Would you support a Bond-style re-cast of Indy after Kingdom?

Maybe.Not Today

New member
Usually I'm all for freedom of speech, but even talking about recasting indy is dangerous blasphemy. lol.

But seriously, Indiana Jones is an iconic character. To me, and hopefully to the rest of the world harrison ford will always be indy, just as he will always be han solo, just as shatner will always be kirk,( let's not kid ourselves, JJ Abrahms train wreck of a rehash isn't going to change that)

As far as James Bond is concerned, it is a totally different situation. Bond was never really a character, he was a personality. As wonderful as connery was, Craig was really the first actor to make bond a character, with actual emotions, who actually responded in a natural way to his surroundings. Everyone before craig played bond as a "witty action hero type a", making it a very easy role to go back and reinvent.
 

Mr. Z

New member
Mickiana said:
That's an interesting point. I don't see why Indy couldn't do adventuring in the digital age. There would just be new opportunities and issues to build stories around. Remember in Jurrasic Park Dr Grant's response to the guys using the new equipment that captures images of the fossils underground and they say, "Soon we won't even have to dig anymore!"? Grant says, "Where's the fun in that?" Archaeology is partly about retrieving the material pieces of the past if we can. The greatest fascination is to be able to see the thing or even hold it. Imagine a museum with only ultrasound scans of fossils - not the same, is it? Every age has its level of technology, but the magic of discovery will always remain the same. And there will always be the bad guys to beat to the prize!

Cheers, Mickiana.

That was very well said Mickiana. :)

As I mentioned before, it would be hard without Ford, since Ford has always been Indy, and was not previously a comic book character or from literature. It seems most people here are in agreement.
 

Mickiana

Well-known member
Time will tell

Time will tell and proof will come. The next generation will want an Indiana Jones of their own. Sure, all the current 4 movies will endure, but inventiveness will produce an answer to the question of the quest and the adventure being able to flourish. Why should our generation be the only one to have the experience of seeing a newly made Indiana Jones movie? Why would you deny that to the future? Answer: Because you are so sentimentally attached to Harrison Ford as IJ. There's nothing wrong with that, in fact, that's how I am. But sentiment can be transferred. A can of worms here?...

Cheers, Mickiana.
 

Travis85

New member
Two of the Indiana Jones movies were made before I was born and I was only 4 when the third was released, which means I had no new Indy movies during my childhood, but they were all new to me the first time I watched them :). Just like I wasn't alive for any of the original Star Wars trilogy releases, those are still the ones I grew up watching as I was already in my late teens when the new ones were released. Despite that there were no new ones, I still enjoyed them and I think they will continue to be enjoyed for more generations as well. However this same discussion happened when Connery left Bond and there were many complains, the same for Doctor Who over the years and still people adjusted and learned to like the new actors in those roles and some even liked them more, so whatever happens i'm sure we will get used to it. I still think it would be best to hand the mantle over to a new younger Indy type character than to keep it as Indiana Jones though.
 

Mickiana

Well-known member
New ideas already

See, the new ideas are coming out already. It is possible and inevitable in my mind. There are so many great stories to be told and seen on the big screen. Which leads me to my next point. Travis85, have you seen any of the first three movies on the big screen? If not, I hope you somehow get to experience this because that's what they were designed for. Sure, they are still good on DVD, but on the big screen they are magic. But how to see them on the big screen now?... Well, a lot of cinemas are installing digital projectors which use DVDs. I'm not sure if any old DVD can be played on them, but if you get to know someone who works in a cinema, such as a projectionist, maybe there's a possibility. Petitioning the owners of the movies to re-release movies might be another way. If enough people ask for it they usually get it. I saw a re-run of Raiders several years ago in my home town on the big screen and it was great. It was a very old copy with fading of colour in the beginning and those wear lines that travel vertically but somehow it lent itself to the mystique. Anyway, my point is seeing these movies on the big screen is the best experience and they are not always going to re-screen old favourites. We will need new ones to see up there on the big silver curtain. Cheers.
 

Travis85

New member
Mickiana, I did see Temple of Doom a couple of years ago at a theater near me. I had seen Temple of Doom a million times before on the small scree and that was the first time I saw an Indy movie on the big screen and will probably be the last until Kingdom. I hope that eventually I can see all of the original three on the big screen :).
 

Michael24

New member
I think they missed their chance by not doing re-release prior to KOTCS's release. Obviously they would have made a fortune, and it would have given a whole generation of fans the chance to see them on the big screen for the first time.

I saw all three films during their original release, though my memories of RAIDERS and TEMPLE OF DOOM are very faint (I was only about 3 and 6 years old, respectively). I would love to see them all again on the big screen.
 

Mickiana

Well-known member
Too right

Michael24, you are right there. These movies are now from long enough ago in the past that they would have had a great revival on the big screen. I was lucky enough to see all 3 on the big screen. I was 13 when I saw Raiders in 1981 and I can still remember almost standing up in my seat to yell out to Indy to hurry up and outrun that boulder! What a mind blower it was. Oh well, see my previous letter about possibilities of getting them back on the big screen. Just maybe...
 

Mickiana

Well-known member
Why?

It's funny (strange), but the people saying "No" often don't say why, just an emphatic "No" is all they offer. Try and articulate why you are against the idea. It will help you to explore your own thinking and maybe gain a new perspective on your old thoughts. When I say "think", I mean that as opposed to the "casual forming of opinions". If we are to be against the recasting of Indy by anyone else, why not go further and say that the fans who don the Indygear in order to emulate him are blaspheming? Where does it end? And it's these accusations of so called 'blaspheming' that are a little limiting, a little frightening. Blaspheming implies an offense towards a religious deity. Let's admire him, like him, even love him but let's not worship him. He wouldn't want that anyway. He's too down to earth. The reason we don the Indygear is so that we can be like him. So why not let a suitable candidate do the same on the next big screen version after Indy4? What's the real problem here, after all?
 

oki9Sedo

New member
Mickiana said:
It's funny (strange), but the people saying "No" often don't say why, just an emphatic "No" is all they offer. Try and articulate why you are against the idea.

Because Ford has become engrained in the public consciousness as Indiana Jones, since he's been in that role for 27 years.

Connery wasn't Bond for long enough for that to happen, so it was okay for them to recast.
 

No Ticket

New member
oki9Sedo said:
Because Ford has become engrained in the public consciousness as Indiana Jones, since he's been in that role for 27 years.

Connery wasn't Bond for long enough for that to happen, so it was okay for them to recast.

I agree. But they could do it one day. When all the people who MADE these original Indys are gone. And someone else gives it a try. IF that day ever comes, that is.
 

oki9Sedo

New member
No Ticket said:
I agree. But they could do it one day. When all the people who MADE these original Indys are gone. And someone else gives it a try. IF that day ever comes, that is.

Who owns the rights?

Because if George Lucas and/or Steven Spielberg do, they'll take those rights with them to their graves and nobody will ever be allowed to touch Indiana Jones again.
 

Mickiana

Well-known member
True, but...

That is true, but I still wouldn't want to assume what the public wants. Harrison Ford has been ingrained in the public consciousness as Indiana Jones, but that's not to say that the public cannot or would not like to see a continuation in some way. And rights can be bought. It's another thing if they are affordable.

In two decades Harrison could be dead or at least too old to do anything other than play a cameo role. How many of the guys are dead now from the first three? The tradition of Indiana can continue and public perception can and does change. The next generation will look back on these first four movies with a more historical view but still with admiration towards Harrison for being the first and maybe still most popular Indiana Jones while someone else gets to walk in his footsteps into the ever continuing future.
 
I don't see why Harrison shouldn't continue into his 70's if he so desired. Look at Roger Moore in A View To A Kill. He is still believable as Bond. Tuxedo, semi-flared trousers, slip on brogues, wrinkles. He's the picture of debonair suavity combined with no-nonsense action man. Ford could still pull it off. No need for a new guy.
 

Mr. Z

New member
Seeing these films, as well as Star Wars, on the big screen takes your breath away in magic, wonder, and excitement. They definitely should have re-released these before Indy IV.
 

KneelBeforeZod

New member
Travis85 said:
Another reason it wouldn't work is that Indy is into the mid 1950's now and part of the whole feel of the series was the era it was set it, can you really have an adventuring archaeologist in the age of the internet and high technology?

Theoretically, after a recast, you would have to set it in the 1920's or 30's again (depending on the age of the actor). It is Harrison Ford's age that requires the new movie be set in the 1950's.

Z
 
Top