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

Mr. Z said:

Intruging points Zod (I feel like we have chatted on other boards). I am torn on this, because, to me (as I'm sure with a lot of other fans), Ford is Indiana Jones. However, in the interest of seeing many more Indy adventures, I suppose it is worth considering if done well. Talk about a slippery slope though.

The difference between Indy and Bond, Supes, Bats, etc. is that Indiana Jones started on the big screen with Harrison Ford. Bond was a literary character for a long time at first, and Supes and Bats were comic book icons long before they hit the big screen. This is a major reason why seeing anyone else as Indy would be a tricky sell.

Click to expand...

I think William Shatner's Captain Kirk would be analoguous. He was originally written for the screen, and has been Kirk for much longer than Harrison has been Indy. Of course it would be a tricky sell ... but no trickier than Chris Pine's Captain Kirk, or Routh's Superman. However, those actors will bring these beloved characters to life for millions of new Trekkies and Superman-fans who never had the opportunity to enjoyed Shatner's Kirk or Reeves' Superman.

To my mind, it is actors like William Shatner, Christopher Reeve, Sean Connery and Harrison Ford that create these characters ... but it will be Chris Pine, Brandon Routh, Moore/Dalton/Brosnan/Craig, and whomever theoretically succeeds Ford's Indy that can make the character transcend. It is successive actors, not originators, that ensure the endurable quality of a character ... for even truly great characters (like The Godfather, for instance) become mere distant memories without constant rejuvination.

It is the continuation of these characters -- and, in the case of Star Trek, the continual development of the Trek Universe -- which has made these figures indelible in CURRENT popular culture. They will be indelible for decades to come. Without a fresh face to continue the Indy legacy, I fear his character will fade over time.

Z

Spot on

re: Kneelbeforezod's comments - I couldn't have said it better myself. Travis85, I'm not sure who could take over the role. Shia I'm not sure about at all. He's definitely too young. River Pheonix might have been the choice, may he rest in peace. I'm not sure who is up and coming. Harrison set a few benchmarks in his portrayal of Indy. The right look, charming, both academic and ruggedly physical, yet without the ego of a superhero or superficially unbreakable. For a new actor to fulfill all of these 'requirements', and they will be required for patron satisfaction, as well as doing it in his own unique way, it will be difficult. We won't just want a copy of Harrison's portrayal, but an enhancement, which is a tall order. We will just have to wait and see.

What era to recast the story line in

Just a comment on kneelbeforezod's remarks about setting Indy in the 20s and 30s after a recast. I think that because they have followed a timeline through actual history that correlates with Indy aging to be in line with Harrison's own real age, they should continue a story line that goes this same route and have the recast Indy (he will probably not be called Indy, he will have his own name and identity) starting in the 50s after the time of Indy4. He will be a younger character of course and will be able to fulfill his role possibly for several decades as Harrison did. Now keep in mind I know this is all wishful thinking, but it is all within the realm of possibility. They did three blockbusters in one decade. Why couldn't that happen again? The number of possible storylines is virtually endless. Any creative person knows this. How could this great opportunity be let go and wasted? If it was up to me, I would make a continuing Indy series-of-movies happen.

I've been kicking this idea around for a little while now and another thread has popped up about it so I'm gonna throw it out.

Why not do some stories about Forrestal? This accomplishes everything. The stories can expand the Indy universe, even referencing Indy at times, and developing their back story and their competitive streak. The idea that I keep seeing in my mind is a final scene where Forrestal leaves word with Jones or somehow rubs it in his face that he's off to Peru to search for the Fertility Idol that brings us right up to Raiders. Oh hell yeah I just thought of this as I was writing. Forrestal crosses paths with Indy at Club Obi-wan just before Indy enters the dining room and chats with Lao Che and sons.

Second, this will preserve the Indy character while allowing us to enjoy more adventures set in the same time period, the early '30s. The Indy timeline is pretty much set. However this will allow for stories in the same universe and Forrestal can cross Indy's timeline as many times as he wants because he is a seperate character entirley, all the while developing his own timeline.

Indy did say that Forrestal was a competitor, so he could be just as adventerous, and just as charming. This doesn't mean that he was a bad guy. Maybe Forrestal was a competitor for Marion's love. This could allow some Abner Ravenwood developement. Maybe Forrestal and Indy were both students of Abner. Maybe he was a competitor for tenure at Indy's university. They have to provide examples of their value to the university, so they go off on these grand adventures to bring back antiquities.

Going this route solves all the issues in my mind. I agree with many of you. Harrison Ford is the only Indiana Jones. However I would love to see the Indy"esque" adventures continue. So by developing another character that was already referenced in the films we can keep the integrity of Indy while still enjoying his adventures. After all Indy did say "He was good, he was very, very good." What better character than one that Indy has great respect for.

Maybe...

I know what you are saying LittleIndy, but I'm not sure if they would want to try to make a full length feature based on a character who we've been introduced to as a corpse impaled on a spike trap. The character didn't even require an actor, just a prop. In movie land, this relegates him to being a total has-been in the minds of the movie goer. In a way, he never was. Just like the spaces between the notes in music help to make music what it is, so are these incidental characters in a storyline. We end up knowing very little about them, only enough to assist the main story and to add mystery and interest. What is important about Forrestal is that Indiana knew him, admired him, competed with him and now found his grisly remains. Forrestal is best left there. We fans would be interested enough for sure, but I don't think the average movie goer would be.

I thought someone would bring that up. Sure everyone knows his demise. But did that keep you from seeing Episodes I II and III, every ones knows that Vader ends up dying in Episode VI. Still people were dying (pun intended) to see how Vader came to be. What about Troy? Who doesn't know that Achilles gets taken out. These are just the first two that came to my mind, I am sure there are other examples out there. The cool thing would be making his character into something bigger than the prop as you mentioned.

The movie series, if they do more than one, doesn't have to dwell on his death or even really acknowledge it. After all the movies would take place before of course. So the average movie goer as you say, wouldn't even realize he was introduced as a dead prop. Maybe something like Star Trek; There are many branch offs in the universe and still ther are people that watch.

If I had my way, the series would end with Ford!

But, in Hollywood nothing stays sacred for long. And if in a few years they decided to start the boulder rolling again, I'd vote for a fresh recast with no one who's been tied to the movies before. I've thrown out these guys names on a few occasions, but here's a few pics for those who don't know who they are.

Gerard Butler


Nathan Fillion


Eric Bana


Joe Flanigan


My vote would be for one of these guys! Sorry Shia!

This is tricky. I have no problem with the various Bonds, various Supermans, and various Batmans, etc because they're literary characters that continue into present day in their original mediums. Indy, however, was created for the screen. There's really little furthering his adventures, and when there is stuff out there in the form of novels/comics/video games, Indy looks like Harrison Ford! I'm against a recast. If they're made, I'd probably give them a whirl and hopefully enjoy them for what they are. But I'll be that old guy in the future telling my kids that there is no other Indy than Harrison Ford like my dad always tells me about Connery as Bond.

I am confused as to why people seem to think that future generations won't have indy. these films won't dissappear, and there is no reason to ruin them with a possibly (in my opinion probably) horrible rehash. Lets get new ideas for new films and not ruin the memories of our old favorites.

deckard24 said:

If I had my way, the series would end with Ford!

But, in Hollywood nothing stays sacred for long. And if in a few years they decided to start the boulder rolling again, I'd vote for a fresh recast with no one who's been tied to the movies before. I've thrown out these guys names on a few occasions, but here's a few pics for those who don't know who they are. [...]

Click to expand...

I like Eric Bana and Fillion particularly ... don't know much about the other two. As I noted before, Adrian Pasdar from Heroes might work



He fits the bill physically, and isn't a bad actor from what I've seen of Heroes. He's also somewhat unknown, which is a definite plus.

Z

I think it's pretty safe to assume that no one will don the fedora but Ford. Spielberg himself seems pretty into that idea and it goes deeper with him I think then just the film. He is friends with Ford and I think he knows how much that role means to him.

In addition, I think Lucas is taking the rights to these things to the grave. You'll likely not see any other live-action INDIANA JONES movies with anyone other than Ford in your lifetimes, at least.

Clearing a few things up

A few of us are talking on different levels about slightly different topics. I'm not suggesting another thread is necessary though. I am talking about new movies being made for the big screen that new and old audiences can enjoy in that format. I am ultimately suggesting that Harrison Ford's Indy will have to retire eventually from teaching, adventuring, etc and, tragically of course, kick the bucket sometime. Storywise he is 58 yo so of course he doesn't have to die soon but die he must sometime even if it is at a ripe old age. Actually, if Harrison were willing to do more movies now as Indy, I don't see any reason why they couldn't do possibly a few more. He's certainly fit and healthy enough. But consider that he doesn't want to for whatever reason and consider that the public would like to see some kind of continuation of the Indy genre happen somehow and that someone were willing to make it. Trying to create another Indy, though, to fit into the thirties time slot would seem a bit of a sham and no one wants an Indy who isn't played by Harrison. So, what to do? There has to be another viable character to take his place and continue on the genre after Harrison's Indy finally does his last movie. But the new character won't be called Indy and the name Indiana Jones won't be in the movie title as they now popularly use it. But somehow there will be a connection to Indy. How? I'm not sure at all. I'm not a script writer, but perhaps the new archaeologist can find clues and mysterious puzzles to some great discovery waiting to happen amongst archives and files left by Professor Jones Jr. That suggestion provides a tenuous connection but it would be a type of continuation. Everyone is surmising that Shia might be a candidate. It might be so. All of my ramblings are pure speculation of course so don't take any of it too seriously. It's just fun to speculate. Cheers.

KneelBeforeZod said:

Had to look up who Fillion was ... he certainly looks the part. The only thing I've seen him in was Blast from the Past.

Click to expand...

He's most famous for his role as Malcolm Reynolds (who has often been compared to another famous character played by Harrison Ford ) in the sadly short-lived 2002 TV series Firefly and the 2005 follow-up film Serenity. I highly suggest you check them both out. Here's the trailer for Serenity: http://www.apple.com/trailers/universal/serenity/

If they hadn't moved on and made a movie in the fifties with Indy in his, then yes perhaps a recast may have worked. Characters like Bond etc are always contemporary and around the same age, making it easier to recast, there are others I mean, how many Holmes and Watsons have there been?, etc.
I think this allowing the character to age issue is the stickler. If Indy were recast, then I think a return to his 'roots' in the 30's and 40's is in order too.
Truthfully there are many actors around the 35-40 mark who may make good Jones's.
All of them Highly contentious in the casting stakes, my favourite would have been River Pheonix, had he lived. I think he nailed Indy in L.C. it would have been interesting to see how he'd aged. He'd have been 38 now perfect for Indy.
Personally I like Colin ferguson from Eureka.



He has a similar physicallity to H.F. and bags of charisma.

i cant recall ever seeing gerard butler acting, but stick a federa on him and he looks the part

KneelBeforeZod said:

He fits the bill physically, and isn't a bad actor from what I've seen of Heroes.

Click to expand...

the acting in heroes is appaulling, i think they all went to the same acting school as the cast of neighbours. definately a no.

I think the main reason that no one should be Indy besides Harrison Ford is the fact that Harrison Ford is Indy. He can do everything Indiana Jones can, he can kick your ass the same way Indiana Jones can, and he can use a whip the same way Indiana Jones can. No one else can or should be Indy.

it kinda depends on the actor. If they had an actor in mind I could probably make a better decision. But I guess I would be open to it.

Hmm, Eric Bana seems pretty good!

Take a look at his most recent pic. Forget the baldness and see the smirk on his face

The resemblence is striking (to ROTLA especially):

barranca said:

If they hadn't moved on and made a movie in the fifties with Indy in his, then yes perhaps a recast may have worked. Characters like Bond etc are always contemporary and around the same age, making it easier to recast, there are others I mean, how many Holmes and Watsons have there been?, etc.
I think this allowing the character to age issue is the stickler. If Indy were recast, then I think a return to his 'roots' in the 30's and 40's is in order too.
Truthfully there are many actors around the 35-40 mark who may make good Jones's.
All of them Highly contentious in the casting stakes, my favourite would have been River Pheonix, had he lived. I think he nailed Indy in L.C. it would have been interesting to see how he'd aged. He'd have been 38 now perfect for Indy.
Personally I like Colin ferguson from Eureka.

He has a similar physicallity to H.F. and bags of charisma.

Click to expand...

I've never seen this guy in anything before, but he certainly looks the part!

Yeah Blue Jay, Bana's definitely got the cocky Ford/Indy vibe in that pic!