What year should Indy 5 be set?

Raiders90

Well-known member
Duaner said:
I am agreeing with the majority on here. Even though it may be set in the 1960s, we don't want to have Kennedys, astronauts, Hippies, or Beatles.

Thing is, the 60s was just a decade like any other...I mean, we were in the 1930s for the first three films but FDR, the Depression and Clark Gable didn't enter into it. And the Hippies weren't a cornerstone fo the entire decade, nor were the Kennedys or Astronauts. Indiana Jones is someone who exists outside of that world, always has. Maybe Henry Jones, Jr, the professor, takes an interest in the goings on of the world, but for Indy, no matter what the current year is, his head is always in the past.
 

Pale Horse

Moderator
Staff member
WilliamBoyd8 said:
From the Los Angeles Times April 1, 1970:

Leisure Acres Retirement Community sells first home to retired archaeology professor Henry...

:)


It fits:
latest
 

Duaner

New member
Raiders112390 said:
Thing is, the 60s was just a decade like any other...I mean, we were in the 1930s for the first three films but FDR, the Depression and Clark Gable didn't enter into it. And the Hippies weren't a cornerstone fo the entire decade, nor were the Kennedys or Astronauts. Indiana Jones is someone who exists outside of that world, always has. Maybe Henry Jones, Jr, the professor, takes an interest in the goings on of the world, but for Indy, no matter what the current year is, his head is always in the past.

Did you miss the last movie though when we were in the 1950s which were also (using your terms) "a decade like any other"? We were still subjected to McCarthyism, Howdy Doody, Elvis Presley, greasers, 50s diners, the Cold War, the bomb, and "Wake Up Little Susie". If Indiana Jones exists outside that world why did they cram the 1950s down our throats? KOTCS had too many reminders to the audience that it was the 1950s and that needs to be avoided in Indy 5.

Side note - I have no idea how you can say that Kennedys, astronauts, and Hippies are not "cornerstones" of the 1960s.
 

temple_runner

New member
dr.jones1986 said:
I like that show as well and when I saw that episode I thought it would make a great Indy adventure set during the Vietnam War. We have yet to see Indy in South East Asia, which would make a great setting for the film. It would certainly have the type of locals that Indy would feel at home in.

The story and the locals reminded me a little of the premise of Temple of Doom. It would definitely fit and the power of the linga mixed with the Vietnam war zone would make a compelling story to say the least.
 

dr.jones1986

Active member
temple_runner said:
The story and the locals reminded me a little of the premise of Temple of Doom. It would definitely fit and the power of the linga mixed with the Vietnam war zone would make a compelling story to say the least.

Not to mention a built in villain with communists, perhaps even the Khmer Rouge depending on what year you are setting the film in. They would certainly fit the bill for the type of villains we have seen in the Indiana Jones series.
 

The Lone Raider

Well-known member
dr.jones1986 said:
Not to mention a built in villain with communists, perhaps even the Khmer Rouge depending on what year you are setting the film in. They would certainly fit the bill for the type of villains we have seen in the Indiana Jones series.
I actually like this idea. It sounds really interesting and it could work. I would only hope though that the plot would be more original.

I personally think they'd need to give the fifth movie a "swan song" vibe and make it a little more original, rather than make it "just another Indiana Jones adventure". This needs to be more of an "Indiana Jones' last adventure" movie, going out with a bang, and while I do like the idea, I don't know that I could see it as a strong enough setting for a franchise that's about to go out with a bang.

But that's just my take on it.
 

Raiders90

Well-known member
I really hope they keep the series out of the 1970s, and preferably also away from the late 1960s. The Hippie Era and Indiana Jones don't mix. Anywhere past 1965 is way too modern to work. Watergate and Indiana Jones don't mix.
 

Raiders90

Well-known member
Attila the Professor said:
But the assassination is such well-tred territory in fiction; its concerns, frankly, seem rather remote from those of the Indiana Jones series.

Without stepping on JFK Assassination territory, there is an interesting case to be made for having fringe elements of the U.S. government be the bad guys in this one. For example having a Neo-Nazi fringe of the CIA or something at play, working with the Mafia or some other conspiracy related group, to get some kind of artifact to determine the course of the Cold War or resurrect Hitler or something. Basically, taking cues from the JFK conspiracy, without actually stepping into that mess (perhaps setting it before the assassination, say in 1961, to avoid it).
 

Raiders90

Well-known member
Duaner said:
Did you miss the last movie though when we were in the 1950s which were also (using your terms) "a decade like any other"? We were still subjected to McCarthyism, Howdy Doody, Elvis Presley, greasers, 50s diners, the Cold War, the bomb, and "Wake Up Little Susie". If Indiana Jones exists outside that world why did they cram the 1950s down our throats? KOTCS had too many reminders to the audience that it was the 1950s and that needs to be avoided in Indy 5.

Side note - I have no idea how you can say that Kennedys, astronauts, and Hippies are not "cornerstones" of the 1960s.

Yes, it's the exception to the rule. I'm saying that that doesn't have to be the case in the next movie...As to your side note, have you ever seen Mad Men? It's a show set between 1960 and 1970 that, while it touches on elements of the popular culture version of the '60s, doesn't make those elements the focal point. What I am saying is, the 60s weren't The Wonder Years; they weren't defined by the pop cultural events of the decade. There are ways to have the film be set in the 1960s without "The '60s" being present.
 

The Lone Raider

Well-known member
With the early 60s being a transitional period from the late fifties, before all of the familiar 60s pop culture took off, I think that anywhere from 1959-1964 would be best time period.
 

Duaner

New member
Raiders112390 said:
Yes, it's the exception to the rule. I'm saying that that doesn't have to be the case in the next movie...

Raiders112390 said:
There are ways to have the film be set in the 1960s without "The '60s" being present.

And I agree with that. That was what I originally posted. My implication was that the things you think of when you hear 1960s: Kennedys, astronauts, Beatles, Hippies, etc. do not have to be included in an Indy movie just because it is set in the 1960s. I want that to be avoided in this movie. This was an agreement with those saying we need to avoid working things like the Kennedy assassination into the story. That's not Indy. Same way I don't want a 1960s style "spy film" - also not Indy. I want a cliffhanger serial set in an exotic locale where the year is irrelevant. In my opinion the year just needs to make sense in relation to how old Harrison looks. 1965-1967 does the job.
 

Lance Quazar

Well-known member
2936 - it's one thousand years later. And someone's coming for the Ark.

The only one who can save the world is the reanimated corpse of Indiana Jones.
 

Lance Quazar

Well-known member
Duaner said:
And I agree with that. That was what I originally posted. My implication was that the things you think of when you hear 1960s: Kennedys, astronauts, Beatles, Hippies, etc. do not have to be included in an Indy movie just because it is set in the 1960s. I want that to be avoided in this movie. This was an agreement with those saying we need to avoid working things like the Kennedy assassination into the story. That's not Indy. Same way I don't want a 1960s style "spy film" - also not Indy. I want a cliffhanger serial set in an exotic locale where the year is irrelevant. In my opinion the year just needs to make sense in relation to how old Harrison looks. 1965-1967 does the job.

I dunno. It seems a shame to ignore all that history.

I remember all those awesome scenes in "Raiders" where Indy went and saw Count Basie at the Savoy, listened to Roosevelt's fireside chats and drove his brand new Ford cabriolet off the lot for the very first time.

If Indy 5 doesn't have him, Malcolm X, Patty Duke and Neil Armstrong personally attending a love-in on Haight-Ashbury, I'll call major B.S.
 

Duaner

New member
Lance Quazar said:
2936 - it's one thousand years later. And someone's coming for the Ark.

The only one who can save the world is the reanimated corpse of Indiana Jones.

That sounds perfect! Start writing it! (y)
 

Duaner

New member
How about 1981? An 82 year old Indy walks into a movie theater to watch a biopic about his most famous adventure entitled Raiders of the Lost Ark. Then we all just watch Raiders again and leave the theater happy. ;)
 

The Lone Raider

Well-known member
temple_runner said:
I always giggled when they said One-Eyed Willie.

Good point, though!

Maybe we'll see Indy lose an eye in this movie.
Actually that would be a great idea. I'm sure a lot of us want to know what happened to his eye. Maybe they'll reveal it in the movie.
 

Indyfan82

Member
I would be interested to see the fifth Indy movie divulge how Indiana Jones lost one of his eyes....but that brings up the question again- are the "Old Indy" scenes of "The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles" still considered canon? (And if so, are he and Marion having a daughter any time soon?) Personally, I still like to think of them as canon, but they seem to have been excised by George Lucas.......yet, TYIJC was referenced in "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull", with Indy's line about riding with Pancho Villa.......
So it seems the show is canon- but maybe not the Old Indy scenes?
 
Top