I'm still hoping for a sequel, but not really confident there will be one. Let's face it, Harrison is getting old. By the time that right script gets approved, he might not be "Indy" enough to film it.
I'm one of those fans who wants the big three to redeem themselves after KOTCS; but I know that as each year passes, it will be almost impossible to make it. If this drags on for more than a year, we might just get a George Hall type of Indy.
I just want more; book, comic, animated series, even a reboot. Just to keep the Indy spirit alive... Also, so I wouldn't feel weird being the only die-hard Indy fan in my country (really, I feel like I'm the only one).
I just want more; book, comic, animated series, even a reboot. Just to keep the Indy spirit alive...
I think animation is the safest way to go forward on film.
But it has to be top quality animation filled with lots of detail and atmosphere. It's the only way we're going to be able to see Harrison as classic Indy in his prime. Not that he'd probably be voicing the character - but you never know!
Live action is only going to leave Indy sidelined as past his best, and as I wrote, "an old guy who no longer fits his job description."
The compromise between presenting a young, energetic hero to the younger members of the audience, while also presenting Indy as the main character to those who grew up with him, is going to be even harder than it was in 2008.
Big screen Indy has hit a cul de sac because he's associated (and rightly so) with a single actor. Therefore a reboot would also be a lesser thing, forever graded against the original classics. Something along the lines of Jack Hunter.
So, I'd stick with the animated route. Clone Wars style. It's also a medium I find more easy to forgive when things aren't quite as expected.
As long as the animation isn't ala clone wars, I'll probably be okay with it.
Clone Wars has atmosphere, but I'd also like the style to be as photo-realistic. That is, as close to Harrison and the movies as possible, so that it would fit almost seamlessly into the series, filling in the gaps and showing us his wartime adventures with Mac.
So, consign Indy forever ONLY to cartoons (and perhaps not even to that), but endless reboots for Batman. Well, it is obvious where some "fans" (and that term is used generously here) loyalties truly lie. You cannot be a Nolan Batman fan, and an Indiana Jones fan.
To paraphrase Pulp Fiction, "there are only two kinds of people in the world: Nolanpeople, and Indypeople. Now, Nolanpeople can like Indy, and Indypeople can like Nolan, but nobody likes them both equally. Somewhere, you have to make a choice--and that choice tells you who you are."
So, consign Indy forever ONLY to cartoons (and perhaps not even to that), but endless reboots for Batman. Well, it is obvious where some "fans" (and that term is used generously here) loyalties truly lie. You cannot be a Nolan Batman fan, and an Indiana Jones fan.
Why do you keep bringing up Batman?
Now you're defining a 'true' fan as one who only wants to see Indy as live action? i.e. either an old Harrison or a reboot?
In any case there was a discussion on the issue of Batman/Indy reboots recently, and it was largely agreed that they're not the same animal. Batman was born in a comic book and his story is updated for each generation so that he never ages (except in non-canon timelines). Hence he can be played by any number of actors, in the same manner as Bond.
Indy moves chronologically through a stated timeframe and is associated with a single actor on the big screen.
There's a big difference.
You reboot Indy without Harrison and he becomes no better than Jack Hunter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiders112390
To paraphrase Pulp Fiction, "there are only two kinds of people in the world: Nolanpeople, and Indypeople. Now, Nolanpeople can like Indy, and Indypeople can like Nolan, but nobody likes them both equally. Somewhere, you have to make a choice--and that choice tells you who you are."
Well that's just some utter hogwash that happens to dominate your brain, but it doesn't make it right.
I'm a fan of many different characters, and their hierarchy depends on which one inspires me most at a given time.
I'm a fan of many different characters, and their hierarchy depends on which one inspires me most at a given time.
Me too. Being a die-hard Indy fan doesn't mean you cannot be a fan of something/someone else.
I consider myself a Star Trek, Star Wars, Batman, Walking Dead, etc... fan. Does that diminish my love for the Indy franchise? I think not.
Although... Here's something we don't agree with regarding Indy... The reboot! I think if they can find a good actor and the right script and director, a reboot might revive the franchise.
Yeah... I know that's a lot of IFs... One can hope, right?
Now you're defining a 'true' fan as one who only wants to see Indy as live action? i.e. either an old Harrison or a reboot?
In any case there was a discussion on the issue of Batman/Indy reboots recently, and it was largely agreed that they're not the same animal. Batman was born in a comic book and his story is updated for each generation so that he never ages (except in non-canon timelines). Hence he can be played by any number of actors, in the same manner as Bond.
Indy moves chronologically through a stated timeframe and is associated with a single actor on the big screen.
There's a big difference.
You reboot Indy without Harrison and he becomes no better than Jack Hunter.
Well that's just some utter hogwash that happens to dominate your brain, but it doesn't make it right.
I'm a fan of many different characters, and their hierarchy depends on which one inspires me most at a given time.
You seem to forget all the Batman fans who flooded this board during '08, who talked more about Batman than Indy and did all they could to trash KOTCS even BEFORE it was released. There was, and I feel remains, a rivalry between the two fandoms. And I dislike Nolan Batman fans as a matter of principle. They're like a cancer on the internet, and if they had their way, all films would be utterly dark, pretentious, overwrought and gritty with no escapism or fun. They're people who invade other popular movies' boards just to hate on them. They did it with KOTCS, they've doing it with The Hobbit on imdb--they will try to utterly destroy and create negative word of mouth for any film which is a financial competitor to Nolan's Batman films.
Indy's already been played by several actors on the small screen. I accept all the stuff we've gotten--the YIJC, the novels, the games, hence why I don't see a reboot as an utter offense. Indy doesn't need to die FOREVER just because KOTCS wasn't as good as you hoped it would be. Indy's never had a "stated timeframe", unless you mean the 20th century from the beginning to mid century. A reboot could take place in the 1920s, 1930s, 1940s, etc. Could take place in 1933, for example. Or 1930. Or 1931. Etc. Could be based on the novels we have or the comics or the video games. A reboot would never erase the originals, so it's not like a reboot would invalidate or erase from history the originals, and might allow for Indy to cover new ground that a Harrison Indy never could have (given the technological constraints, etc).
It's simple. If you don't like the idea of a reboot, don't go see it. Simple as that. Some people don't want Indy to die with KOTCS.
And I don't mind "Old Harrison" either. I love the idea of more sequels set in the 50s or even early 60s. I'm totally game for them and hope it happens.
Last edited by Raiders112390 : 05-05-2012 at 10:40 PM.
You seem to forget all the Batman fans who flooded this board during '08, who talked more about Batman than Indy and did all they could to trash KOTCS even BEFORE it was released.
I wasn't here in 2008.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiders112390
There was, and I feel remains, a rivalry between the two fandoms.
You should ask kongisking about that...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiders112390
And I dislike Nolan Batman fans as a matter of principle.
Then that just makes you a bigot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiders112390
Indy's already been played by several actors on the small screen. I accept all the stuff we've gotten--the YIJC, the novels, the games, hence why I don't see a reboot as an utter offense. Indy doesn't need to die FOREVER just because KOTCS wasn't as good as you hoped it would be.
It's not about KOTCS, but the age of the actor who's played the character on the big screen since he entered the public imagination.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiders112390
Indy's never had a "stated timeframe", unless you mean the 20th century from the beginning to mid century.
He was born in 1899. Unless they change his timeframe he'll always be born in 1899.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiders112390
A reboot could take place in the 1920s, 1930s, 1940s, etc. Could take place in 1933, for example. Or 1930. Or 1931. Etc. Could be based on the novels we have or the comics or the video games. A reboot would never erase the originals, so it's not like a reboot would invalidate or erase from history the originals, and might allow for Indy to cover new ground that a Harrison Indy never could have (given the technological constraints, etc).
It's about the actor playing the part. Anyone but Harrison will make for a second rate Indiana Jones. Why demand an inferior product just because you can't live without another Indy movie?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiders112390
It's simple. If you don't like the idea of a reboot, don't go see it. Simple as that.
I could say the same about your Nolan fetish.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiders112390
Some people don't want Indy to die with KOTCS.
He never dies. He lives on in the imagination, not to mention books and comics where neither Harrison nor Indy need to age.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiders112390
And I don't mind "Old Harrison" either. I love the idea of more sequels set in the 50s or even early 60s. I'm totally game for them and hope it happens.
But where will the action come from? He'll need an ersatz Indy (i.e. Mutt) to re-enact the classic cliffhanger scrapes. Unless George and Steven decide that he's going to be a complete superhero, and not an everyday guy who thrives on luck.
Whilst you're entitled to your Nolan bigotry, I'm entitled to my opinion on the future on Indiana Jones.
Location: Neuchâtel, Switzerland (Canadian from Montreal)
Posts: 6,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyForever
Actually the problem is so called fans like you who do not want the rest of us to have 1 last adventure with an older Indy I mean correct me if I am wrong but these forums are designed for Indiana Jones fans Lucas/Spielberg do not read these forums so your negativity (and most of your posts are very negative surely belong on Imdb where you will get a wider audience ).
In fact can you point me to any positive posts you have made here in the last 4 years????
Not in 4 years but there are many, MANY positive posts from Montana since he joined *3* years ago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiders112390
Well, it is obvious where some "fans" (and that term is used generously here) loyalties truly lie. You cannot be a Nolan Batman fan, and an Indiana Jones fan.
Of all the absurd things you have written, Raiders112390, this statement has to be the most ridiculous of them all (and I'm one who dislikes Batman on film from the '80s up until today). Using The Raven in 2011-2012 as a metre, it's quite obvious that there are dorks out there who (strangely) have a crush on the Nolan Bat-Guy but also love Indy just as much.
Also, Raiders11239983047298374, if you were attentive enough, you'd know that Montana wasn't a member of The Raven in 2008.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiders112390
Indy's never had a "stated timeframe",
Egads! Is your fedora on too tight? What the heck are you talking about?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiders112390
Indy's already been played by several actors on the small screen. I accept all the stuff we've gotten--the YIJC, the novels, the games, hence why I don't see a reboot as an utter offense.
Played by actors younger or older than Harrison Ford in order to portray Indy at different ages. Never an attempt as a "reboot".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiders112390
A reboot could take place in the 1920s, 1930s, 1940s, etc. Could take place in 1933, for example. Or 1930. Or 1931. Etc. Could be based on the novels we have or the comics or the video games. A reboot would never erase the originals, so it's not like a reboot would invalidate or erase from history the originals, and might allow for Indy to cover new ground that a Harrison Indy never could have (given the technological constraints, etc).
Films or a TV show set in the 1920s or early 1930s wouldn't be a "reboot". They would be prequels. In any case...save your "reboot" ideas for the reboot threads. This is about Indy 5 rumours & possibilities!
---
Indy 6 can be a sequel to "Skull", but I want Indy 5 to be a prequel c.1955!
Location: Skull Island (the spiders get in everything!).
Posts: 2,110
In Smiffy's defense, he can be unbelievably witty and his critiques of KOTCS are (mostly) valid. Though I'll admit, I'd like him to tone down the more vicious of his jokes towards Crystal Skull...
And yes, if there's a person here who can talk for hours on end about the silliness of the Great Bat VS Indy War, that would be me. I've stated it before, but I genuinely adore and obsessively love BOTH franchises, so Raiders112390's point with that paraphrase of Pulp Fiction instantly dies.
And as for this:
Quote:
They're like a cancer on the internet, and if they had their way, all films would be utterly dark, pretentious, overwrought and gritty with no escapism or fun. They're people who invade other popular movies' boards just to hate on them. They did it with KOTCS, they've doing it with The Hobbit on imdb--they will try to utterly destroy and create negative word of mouth for any film which is a financial competitor to Nolan's Batman films.
BIG sigh...
I am a huge, huge, huge, pathetically huge Nolanverse Batman fan. I've even made some Joker fan films in my spare time. And I fully intend to attend the midnight showing of Rises.
However...
I also attended the midnight showing of Avengers, a film that is as opposite in style, premise, and execution from Nolan's films as you could get. I grew up a massive Marvel fan, and my interest in DC, for the record, only extends to Bats and Supes. And, lest I forget, some of my favorite films are the fluffiest movies you can think of. Disney films, primarily. And now they own Marvel. Funny...
And I am also a massive LOTR fanbody. I can recite entire passages of dialogue from the films. I think Jackson is as close to a filmmaking God as possible. And I eagerly await The Hobbit this December, to the extent I feel I might die of excitement sitting in the theater opening night. Okay, I exaggerate, but still, I look forward to Hobbit too, and wish it the best of business.
And I'm a hardcore Indy fan. Duh.
So, in conclusion, this is my point. I am living proof that Mr. Raiders' declaration of Batfans as being people who, ahem, "try to utterly destroy and create negative word of mouth for any film which is a financial competitor to Nolan's Batman films," and "if they had their way, all films would be utterly dark, pretentious, overwrought and gritty with no escapism or fun," amounts to guano.
Nice to follow the discussion, I occasionally check in and good to see there is some hope yet for Indy V.
I am sure a live action reboot is more likely and KOTCS was a little short in quality but I would still have a sure interest in seeing a new film with Harrison. If the series was to continue without him, I would prefer an animation format with his likeness, just because emotionally its hard for anyone else to be Indy, in my opinion.
Having said that, I have hope in a credible Indy V if Indy is written according to his age.
I think they could tone down the action but keep a thriller / mystery feel to the film, kind of like the 'thinking' path in "...Fate of Atlantis". Otherwise I like the thought of a Hitchcock vibe as described in the other thread, or even a stripped down "Old West" feel like "The Searchers" crossed with "Twilight Zone", with a moral and old fashioned tone to it (By the way, I am a person in my mid 20's making these suggestions"
I know The Dark Knight came out at the same time as KOTCS back in 08 guys, but seriously that was 4 years ago. Other than that, there's not much of a reason to talk about Batman here anymore. Who cares about comparisons to them at this point? There really is no comparison. They just both happened to be the big movies of that summer. Let's just move on from that.
I've been an avid supporter of "Harrison Ford is the only one who can play Indiana Jones," for pretty much ever. I've always felt that way. But I've finally come around to reality. He is already too old to play Indiana Jones. A fifth movie isn't going to happen at this point, the script will never be finished in time, he's 70 this July. Even if it WERE to get greenlit, it's not the Indiana Jones of my youth. KOTCS just didn't quite recapture who Indy was to me because of both the script in that flick and Harrison's current age disallowing that possibility.
So like you've all said, that leaves us with few other options. An animated series would be quite cool, it would allow for an adventure that let's us keep Harrison as Indy in a way. But it would be coolest if it could be done as a tv series like Clone Wars. That gives us lots of new adventures and time for the show to fix it's flaws if it has any (Clone Wars didn't start out so great). I too would like it to be "photorealistic," but that kind of animation is probably only relegated to movies and I can't see it doing as well as a movie. That TMNT animated movie was kind of created in a similar fashion... a cop-out to making a live action version... and it, wasn't really great or anything.
But yeah... I'm an avid Harrison is Indy guy. But I'm going to finally change that tune. I actually think at this point that we have to kind of let go of the idea of one man is Indy or we delegate the franchise and character to death in pop-culture and pretty much stamp out any further attempts at branching out the series.
I think that a modern take on Indiana Jones with a new character and a new director would actually be the best way to make it interesting again. The CG that would obviously be used would fit more since it's a modern take, the new character would be fresh, the direction could be different. Maybe there can be another Indiana Jones, if they look long and hard enough for just the right person. It doesn't have to be a reboot, it could just be a new idea all together. But. It'll never happen because I don't believe Lucas and Spielberg would allow it. That said, I still don't know if it would really work though as the YIJC didn't really do it for me. That was what originally made me feel like Harrison really IS Indiana Jones.
Part of me just feels dirty saying that. But honestly, Indy works as a young adventurer not an old man and Harrison is definitely an old man now. That pains me to say that. I love Harrison. KOTCS was our chance to see Harrison, older, reprise the role. And honestly, we all were probably thinking the same thing. It would be better if he were younger.
I just don't think a 72 year old Harrison Ford can play Indiana Jones anymore and it work in any real capacity as an Indiana Jones movie that feels like an Indiana Jones movie. And he'll be at least that old when/if the movie begins filming. Hell, at this age, he might only have less than 10 years left. Who knows? 75 is the average lifespan for men these days.
What can really be done about the franchise? I'm in fear of it dying out. Not much happens with the IJ franchise anymore... even on the video-game front... which speaking of....
These days video games are QUITE capable of providing nearly movie like experiences. I'm going to make a Batman reference (but not to the films) despite what I said before haha... but Arkham Asylum and Arkham City both have great action-adventure gaming. Why can't the make an IJ video game as good as that? Why can't they get Harrison to actually VOICE it this time? That would be another great modern way to have a new adventure/story. But the last promising IJ game got canned (the 360/PS3 versions). And there is no real promise of any other ones coming out despite the era of video games we are in.
Location: In the Map Room playing with a laser pointer
Posts: 2,919
Here is your chance (via Twitter) to press someone for an Indy 5 question/answer:
"Weird Al Yankovic I'll be interviewing Harrison Ford on the next episode of Face to Face (out Tuesday) - what would you like me to ask him?"
I'll be honest, I don't do twitter, let alone fanity.com. I found this doing a twitter search for "Indy 5". I say for the hell of it, flood his twitter account with Indy 5 question requests so Al can say "Well, I've got this crazy amount of Indy 5 questions requests, which is weird, so what do you say?"
Location: In the Map Room playing with a laser pointer
Posts: 2,919
HAHAHA!!!! I was in the bag last night when I posted that, can't believe that I didn't stop to consider what the heck Weird Al would be doing interviewing Harrison Ford! What an idiot.
I really don't understand the negativity that boarders on abuse to a filmmaker who has revolutionised an industry, kept his independance and shaped many of our lives.
His only crime was not to meet our expection as we became adults and became cynical of his motives.
Lucas: "I go over and check in on Clone Wars, Underworld is sitting on a shelf somewhere. Right now it's not financially possible. Somebody will do it one day - I probably won't be around!"
I don't know if he means retired or expired, but it sounds like he's adopted a very hands-off approach to Star Wars at least.
Quote:
"The people who are analysing it, they're analysing their navel, basically. That will get me in trouble, won't it?"
So the Sarlacc is some kind of navel? Interesting! To the forums!
His only crime was not to meet our expection as we became adults and became cynical of his motives.
Hardly. His crime was that he took sole credit for Star Wars, Empire, etc., ignored the contributions of his staffers, actively screwed his franchising partners, alienated most of the people who have ever worked with him, and directly and repeatedly insulted his fans (starting way back with criticisms of Jedi) and was basically an all-around hypocritical douche for the past 20 years.
Now, with all of that aside, if he had continued to make great movies, that would be one thing. But he put out an embarassing 'prequel' trilogy and a very weak sequel for Indiana Jones. In the meantime he has repeatedly added stupid edits to his true hits in order to fufill his 'vision', or to require double-or-triple-dipping on purchases of his movies, etc.
The man thinks of himself as a king, and treats everyone else accordingly. I'm very glad he retired, since maybe someone who's still talented and hungry for success can put out some decent product.
).
The future of the IJ franchise...
