Wow- I read that article- and I agree with Stoo's assessment.
The piece had some really bad grammar and it comes from a trashy British tabloid. (Not that other countries don't have their share of trashy tabloids, but for some reason the UK seems to be notorious for it.)
I'll need to see some official confirmation from Disney before I believe that- I'm rather doubtful to its authenticity right now.
I also agree with this.
'A new film series' is not a term, bro, and the meaning is too broad.
"New film series" is not a term? Heh, don't be so close-minded, LastCrusader. When I first joined The Raven in 2005 (and decades previous to that), nobody used 'franchise' & 'reboot' to describe the Indy films (or any film series for that matter). Don't delude yourself, dude.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLastCrusader
Many series have been rebooted recently. From Batman and Bond to Spider-Man and Superman... Different actors, often accompanied by a refreshed origin story, and a new plot. A reboot's a reboot. I'm very sorry this fact doesn't fit into your self-constructed reality.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reboot_(fiction)
So what? Just because certain superheroes have been "rebooted" doesn't mean that a new actor for Indiana Jones automatically means a "reboot". You're missing the point.
I get really tired of the "reboot" and "installment" terms that are used. They are both computer terms and I understand that they've been adopted into the common vernacular to use in terms of movies and movie series, but I do think they are other words that could be used. For instance, a movie series could be said to be "butterflied" (just to make up a term that can be used as slang) when the series is continued with new actors and actresses and returns to the original premise, albeit with a new take on it. (In the same way that God made the caterpillar to eventually metamorphose into a butterfly. The butterfly is still the caterpillar in a sense, but in another sense, the creature is totally transformed at the same time. In fact, C.S. Lewis would probably say the animal is more itself than ever before now.
)
"Metamorphosis" itself would be an appropriate term as well. One could also use "transform", "convert", "invert", "reform", "restart", "refresh" [okay, those last two are computer terms too
] or maybe "mutate" (which would be very accurate for "X-Men: Days of Future Past"
)
Sean Connery IS James Bond. Jack Nicholson IS the Joker. William Shatner IS Captain James T. Kirk. Anthony Hopkins IS Hannibal Lecter. William Hartnell IS the Doctor.
One point about these characters and the aforementioned Batman, Bond, Spider-Man and Superman. Batman, Superman and Spider-Man (and all other comic book superheroes) are based on their source material- the comic books. Thus, Christopher Nolan's series of Batman movies are not necessarily a "cocoon" of Joel Schumacher's Batman movies and Tim Burton's Batman movies. Rather, they are a fresh take on a classic comic book character. In fact, the "Batman Begins" movie itself is largely based on Frank Miller's classic "Batman: Year One" comic book storyline.
The same goes for Superman and Spider-Man. "Superman Returns" could rightfully be called a continuation of the Christopher Reeve Superman movies though. "Man of Steel", however, is clearly a new interpretation of the character altogether, definitely inspired by some of the most recent Superman comic books.
As for Spider-Man, Andrew Garfield's movies are a new take on Spidey, based on the comics. (Though the origin story is quite different and that's one change I didn't really like. The Tobey Maguire movies did that much better and much truer to the comic books.)
The James Bond movies are based on Ian Fleming's novels. And many people have portrayed the character, though I agree that Sir Sean Connery is James Bond- and Henry Jones, Sr. (and Allan Quatermain and Darby O'Gill, for that matter.)
Jack Nicholson played a great Joker- but I think everyone knows Cesar Romero IS The Joker.
[And Heath Ledger did a great job too, though "The Dark Knight" is not necessarily my favorite of Nolan's Batman movies- it gets a little too violent and over the top for me at times. But that's just a side comment.] But this movie character is also based on the Batman comic books.
I don't really care about Hannibal Lecter and the novels by Thomas Harris that feature him- but again, that movie character is based on novels.
William Hartnell certainly is The Doctor- but that character is in a little different category, since the show's creators designed him to be able to regenerate and thus, have different people portray him over the years.
William Shatner, however, IS Captain James T. Kirk- mainly since he originated the character on "Star Trek"- and he continued to portray him in the movies. Chris Pine does a nice job as Kirk, but I have not been totally happy with the J.J. Abrams movies. (I'm still waiting for a resolution for the original Spock and the planet of Vulcan, but it doesn't seem like it's happening.) I think it's more appropriate to make comparisons here, since Shatner really is the original and there is no other source version before him.
Indiana Jones is in the same category with Harrison Ford being the originator of the role. All other variations came after his iconic appearance in "Raiders of the Lost Ark".
So, yes- it's possible Disney will decide to reinvent the Indiana Jones movies with another actor portraying Indy (presumably a younger Indy to fill some of the gaps from the years 1921 to 1934 or so)- but I don't know that I would like that too much. (Though as a fan of Indiana Jones, I'm sure I would check them out.) I would prefer just to see at least one more Indiana Jones movie made with Harrison Ford starring as Indiana Jones and leave it at that. (As I agree that he can only reasonably be expected to play Indy or any other action role for only a few more years.)
Of course, I also know that where there is money to (potentially) be made, movie companies are going to keep making movies and Disney will no doubt seek to continue the adventures of their property wherever they can. I just hope they will do it well.