Shia: We botched the last Indiana Jones film

Indy's brother

New member
You have to wonder. If KOTCS had been scripted/edited differently, just enough to make it simply a better movie, would anyone care so much about it's cinematography, or cgi, or Shia, or even Aliens? There are parts to enjoy and there are, (*ahem*) other parts. It's hard if not impossible for a fan to truly look at it objectively in either case.

No matter what Shia's true opinion is remains completely inconsequential. His comments do nothing to better the film, or make any impact on the eventuality of an Indy 5, or it's content. It may lesson or completely remove his screen-time from an Indy 5, should it emerge.
 

Montana Smith

Active member
Indy's brother said:
It may lesson or completely remove his screen-time from an Indy 5, should it emerge.

To me, Mutt was the weakest aspect of KOTCS. The character didn't work, or at least Shia couldn't make him work. I was more prepared to believe and explain away the nuked fridge than I was explain away Mutt and the scenes he's most strongly associated with - such as the monkey swinging and the snake.

As time passes I'm finding myself more critical of KOTCS - and it's Mutt that's really annoying me now. If he was supposed to be an annoying upstart, then Shia played him well, and there's no way he could ever replace Indy as the lead.

Without Mutt, and Indy unhampered by his family, the next movie can get back on course. Indy-pendant, as I wrote elsewhere.
 

Indy's brother

New member
Montana Smith said:
As time passes I'm finding myself more critical of KOTCS - and it's Mutt that's really annoying me now.

Yeah, that made me "lol". I get more annoyed with KOTCS every time I see it. I used to go back and forth with it, defend it, hate it, scream at it from across the room, force myself to keep watching it over and over in the hopes that it was all the repeat viewings of the OT that have made me love them so much.......Turns out I can't stop rolling my eyes at it. I can't will myself into loving it.

So here we are, Shia takes a turn as Captain Obvious, alternately absorbing and deflecting blame to suit his agenda. People alternately loving and hating his comments. Not that it matters, in the sense that no press is bad press, he's playing the game right I guess. Disgusting. Even worse is that this is the closest thing to news we've gotten on Indy 5 in a while.
 

Montana Smith

Active member
Indy's brother said:
Yeah, that made me "lol". I get more annoyed with KOTCS every time I see it. I used to go back and forth with it, defend it, hate it, scream at it from across the room, force myself to keep watching it over and over in the hopes that it was all the repeat viewings of the OT that have made me love them so much.......Turns out I can't stop rolling my eyes at it. I can't will myself into loving it.

At first I tried to ignore the existence of KOTCS.

Then I chanced upon a second-hand DVD.

I thought, 'What the hell, let's give it a go.'

After my first watching I thought, 'That wasn't too bad.' It had the music, it had Harrison as Indy, I even liked the fridge, and accepted the waterfalls. It felt like an Indy movie, but very high on outrageous cliffhangers, which is to be expected when every movie had to best it's predecessor.

There was one aspect I couldn't accept: Mutt.

He looked so camp dressed as Marlon Brando, and he never convinced me that he was the action hero trying to replace his aging father.

I like KOTCS as it's a continuation of the Indy story - it's not where I would have liked to see Indy's life going (his long lost son and marriage to Marion) - but I still look on all four movies as part of one man's story.

With Mutt I think it's where they (or Shia) really dropped the ball. Harrison was convincing as the older, yet still roguish, archaeologist. Shia just didn't convince as the badass yoof. His fake hard man biker act never went away. There's no way that I can accept him as Harrison's replacement, and it's just as well that Indy snatched his fedora back at the end of the movie.

There are moments in KOTCS that I love, and moments that I hate (or at least make me cringe). It's a concoction, a strange brew, designed to appeal to both the younger audience and the grizzled older Indy fans. It failed to become the complete article. And Shia's Mutt is the ingredient that annoys me most.
 

Indy's brother

New member
Montana Smith said:
It felt like an Indy movie, but very high on outrageous cliffhangers, which is to be expected when every movie had to best it's predecessor.

That's the problem with sequels. Why fix a formula that works? Tweak it and make it different, but the "more is better" approach to sequels smacks of desperation and is a risky affair. It kills me that writers, directors, and producers don't see this.

Montana Smith said:
He looked so camp dressed as Marlon Brando

No kidding about the campy bit. That was too far.
 

avidfilmbuff

New member
Montana Smith said:
At first I tried to ignore the existence of KOTCS.

Then I chanced upon a second-hand DVD.

I thought, 'What the hell, let's give it a go.'

After my first watching I thought, 'That wasn't too bad.' It had the music, it had Harrison as Indy, I even liked the fridge, and accepted the waterfalls. It felt like an Indy movie, but very high on outrageous cliffhangers, which is to be expected when every movie had to best it's predecessor.

There was one aspect I couldn't accept: Mutt.

He looked so camp dressed as Marlon Brando, and he never convinced me that he was the action hero trying to replace his aging father.

I like KOTCS as it's a continuation of the Indy story - it's not where I would have liked to see Indy's life going (his long lost son and marriage to Marion) - but I still look on all four movies as part of one man's story.

With Mutt I think it's where they (or Shia) really dropped the ball. Harrison was convincing as the older, yet still roguish, archaeologist. Shia just didn't convince as the badass yoof. His fake hard man biker act never went away. There's no way that I can accept him as Harrison's replacement, and it's just as well that Indy snatched his fedora back at the end of the movie.

There are moments in KOTCS that I love, and moments that I hate (or at least make me cringe). It's a concoction, a strange brew, designed to appeal to both the younger audience and the grizzled older Indy fans. It failed to become the complete article. And Shia's Mutt is the ingredient that annoys me most.

I would never accept anyone replacing Harrison Ford. I accept Mutt as a chance for Indy to have a family along with Marion, but never as a replacement. It would be a sad day for all Indy fans if Speilberg and Lucas tried to replace Indy.
 

Montana Smith

Active member
avidfilmbuff said:
I would never accept anyone replacing Harrison Ford. I accept Mutt as a chance for Indy to have a family along with Marion, but never as a replacement. It would be a sad day for all Indy fans if Speilberg and Lucas tried to replace Indy.

This is an argument where some say that Indy as a character supercedes Harrison the actor. However, I firmly believe that the Indy we know was largely created by Harrison. This is evidenced by Harrison's passion and commitment to the character, and by the annotated script that Rocket wrote of in another thread.

Therefore, anyone taking on the role of the adult Indy, or trying to replace him as the 'son of Indy', might as well be starring in their own unrelated Indy adventure film.

Shia is right to accept some of the blame for any failings in KOTCS. As an actor he is obviously not in the same class as Harrison. In KOTCS Shia was 'adequate', and 'adequate' just isn't good enough for an Indy movie. We wait years for such an event, and it's not as though you can say that there'll always be another one coming along in two years.

Shia's revelation about "botching" the movie is possibly a revelation that he just wasn't commited as strongly as he should have been. A better actor might have wrestled more out of the role.
 

kongisking

Active member
Indy's brother said:
Wha-...? The groundhogs, the car, the fridge, the monkeys, the ants, the fleshed-out alien.

Those were "scenery". As in, "Background elements."

Indy's brother said:
as much as I like John McClane, him riding on the back of a fighter jet was that series fridge-nuking scene. That kind of over-the-top is fine if that is what the source material dictates. But once you stretch the credibility of an existing film universe to that extreme, well then you suffer the wrath of your loyal fan-base.

Well, I thought it was pretty badass, at any rate...:eek:
 

Darth Vile

New member
Montana Smith said:
At first I tried to ignore the existence of KOTCS.

Then I chanced upon a second-hand DVD.

I thought, 'What the hell, let's give it a go.'

After my first watching I thought, 'That wasn't too bad.' It had the music, it had Harrison as Indy, I even liked the fridge, and accepted the waterfalls. It felt like an Indy movie, but very high on outrageous cliffhangers, which is to be expected when every movie had to best it's predecessor.

There was one aspect I couldn't accept: Mutt.

He looked so camp dressed as Marlon Brando, and he never convinced me that he was the action hero trying to replace his aging father.

I like KOTCS as it's a continuation of the Indy story - it's not where I would have liked to see Indy's life going (his long lost son and marriage to Marion) - but I still look on all four movies as part of one man's story.

With Mutt I think it's where they (or Shia) really dropped the ball. Harrison was convincing as the older, yet still roguish, archaeologist. Shia just didn't convince as the badass yoof. His fake hard man biker act never went away. There's no way that I can accept him as Harrison's replacement, and it's just as well that Indy snatched his fedora back at the end of the movie.

There are moments in KOTCS that I love, and moments that I hate (or at least make me cringe). It's a concoction, a strange brew, designed to appeal to both the younger audience and the grizzled older Indy fans. It failed to become the complete article. And Shia's Mutt is the ingredient that annoys me most.

I don't think Mutt was ever really meant to replace Indy. He was supposed to be a sidekick in the way that Short Round and Henry Jones Senior where. I think Henry Jones Senior is a more successful character (mainly because of Sean Connery himself), but I found Mutt to be a lot more interesting, and believable than Short Round. But that's just my take. :)
 
Last edited:

Montana Smith

Active member
Darth Vile said:
I don't think Mutt was ever really meant to replace Indy. He was supposed to be a sidekick in the way that Short Round and Henry Jones Senior where. I think Henry Jones Senior is a more successful character (mainly because of Sean Connery himself), but I found Mutt to be a lot more interesting, and believable than Short Round.

I agree with both those latter points - to the extent that Connery is a far superior actor playing a far more engaging character, and Short Round was an annoying little kid, which was fair game in the 1980s which was full of films with annoying kids.

I think Mutt was intended to represent a convincing young action hero, to take some of the pressure off Indy, and to appeal to a more youthful audience, but he failed to convince me.

As for replacing Indy, the final scene implied that one day he was going to earn that fedora. Thankfully, just not yet.
 

Darth Vile

New member
Montana Smith said:
I agree with both those latter points - to the extent that Connery is a far superior actor playing a far more engaging character, and Short Round was an annoying little kid, which was fair game in the 1980s which was full of films with annoying kids.

I think Mutt was intended to represent a convincing young action hero, to take some of the pressure off Indy, and to appeal to a more youthful audience, but he failed to convince me.

As for replacing Indy, the final scene implied that one day he was going to earn that fedora. Thankfully, just not yet.

Yeah - I'd agree. Shia was more than likely brought in to appeal to a specific demographic that Harrison Ford, unfortunately, can no longer appeal to. The reality is that going forward, any Indy movie involving Ford will more than likely have to have a younger actor to play alongside him. That's meant as no disrespect to Ford (as I thought he was great), but rather a realisation that Ford's better days as a 'leading man' are now behind him.
 

Montana Smith

Active member
Darth Vile said:
Yeah - I'd agree. Shia was more than likely brought in to appeal to a specific demographic that Harrison Ford, unfortunately, can no longer appeal to. The reality is that going forward, any Indy movie involving Ford will more than likely have to have a younger actor to play alongside him. That's meant as no disrespect to Ford (as I thought he was great), but rather a realisation that Ford's better days as a 'leading man' are now behind him.

It's a sad fact that legions of faithful fans are likely to be left behind...

Unless, that is, Lucas and Spielberg realize that KOTCS didn't actually gain the youth support as much as expected (which was also bad news for those of us who collect toys!) and go back to relying on Harrison in a story that will call for guts and determination, but with a little less whip swinging and leaping.

When discussions come round to Harrison's age, I always play the John Wayne card. Some of his best films were late in life, when he was less than agile and carrying a bit of extra weight, yet he was still the tough leading man. Clint Eastwood's another tough leading actor who is really looking his age - but the steely determination is still in his eyes.

With a sensitive script I'm sure Harrison can complete a second Indy trilogy without the assistance of Shia or another younger sidekick. Though it'd probably be best to film them back to back.
 

Darth Vile

New member
Montana Smith said:
It's a sad fact that legions of faithful fans are likely to be left behind...

Unless, that is, Lucas and Spielberg realize that KOTCS didn't actually gain the youth support as much as expected (which was also bad news for those of us who collect toys!) and go back to relying on Harrison in a story that will call for guts and determination, but with a little less whip swinging and leaping.

When discussions come round to Harrison's age, I always play the John Wayne card. Some of his best films were late in life, when he was less than agile and carrying a bit of extra weight, yet he was still the tough leading man. Clint Eastwood's another tough leading actor who is really looking his age - but the steely determination is still in his eyes.

With a sensitive script I'm sure Harrison can complete a second Indy trilogy without the assistance of Shia or another younger sidekick. Though it'd probably be best to film them back to back.

Don't get me wrong... I don't doubt that Harrison Ford has, if he wants to, some great movies/performances left in him. What I seriously doubt though is his capacity/capability to portray an elderly Indiana Jones that the public are 100% comfortable with (especially kids). The thing is, as I understand it, Indiana Jones was never conceived as being an old man. The character may have been devised as being physically fallible ("it's not the years, it's the mileage")... but nonetheless, was designed to be an action hero, a rogue, a playboy and a womaniser. And as interesting as it is to see an older version of the character, for me at least, there is no getting away from the fact that an old Indy, regardless of the story, is simply a weaker premise (IMHO).

Re. other older actors... Clint Eastwood's 'Dirty Harry' is a good example of a great movie character that didn't age particularly well, and although some may very well say KOTCS has already reached that level, I wouldn't want to see an Indy version of 'The Dead Pool'. It's also worth mentioning that John Wayne's/Clint Eastwood's more celebrated roles (in their respective latter careers) were also underpinned by younger characters/performers playing along side them...
 

Montana Smith

Active member
Darth Vile said:
Don't get me wrong... I don't doubt that Harrison Ford has, if he wants to, some great movies/performances left in him. What I seriously doubt though is his capacity/capability to portray an elderly Indiana Jones that the public are 100% comfortable with (especially kids).

Yes, I understood that, and was agreeing with you. It will be impossible to get 100% public acceptance - if that was what was being attempted in KOTCS it was obviously a failure. This should therefore guide Lucas and Spielberg's decisions for Indy V.

KOTCS looked like a sop to garner support from both ends of the spectrum: the original fans who wanted to see Harrison, and a new younger audience who would look to Shia as their hero.

Darth Vile said:
The thing is, as I understand it, Indiana Jones was never conceived as being an old man. The character may have been devised as being physically fallible ("it's not the years, it's the mileage")... but nonetheless, was designed to be an action hero, a rogue, a playboy and a womaniser.

For me that's the special quality of this series of films. It's one of those rare occasions when we get to see an iconic character age, and finally accept their limitations.

Darth Vile said:
And as interesting as it is to see an older version of the character, for me at least, there is no getting away from the fact that an old Indy, regardless of the story, is simply a weaker premise (IMHO).

It's a fact that the story would have to be tailored in such a way that Harrison can play the role convincingly. That's where the suspense and creepy mystery element would come in. Harrison's Indy is an engaging character even when not in full flight, and when it did come to action he can still use a gun, and he could still drive a car (or an aero sled!)

Darth Vile said:
Re. other older actors... Clint Eastwood's 'Dirty Harry' is a good example of a great movie character that didn't age particularly well, and although some may very well say KOTCS has already reached that level, I wouldn't want to see an Indy version of 'The Dead Pool'. It's also worth mentioning that John Wayne's/Clint Eastwood's more celebrated roles (in their respective latter careers) were also underpinned by younger characters/performers playing along side them...

Again, it comes down to the writing.

In The Line of Fire dealt specifically with the aging hero idea. Clint Eastwood was a 63 year old actor playing a character struggling to keep up his more youthful colleagues in a very demanding job.

John Wayne was often surrounded by much younger actors, as you write, but he was always the main character, even when he was dying of cancer in The Shootist. He was engaging as the hero even well past his prime, but as you also implied, this is a difficult idea to sell to the general public.

In KOTCS Shia was supposed to inject a youthful dynamic, yet he did botch that attempt. The problem now is, if Indy V requires a young sidekick to sell itself, can they return to Shia? Can he be more convincing next time around, without taking the focus completely away from Harrison?

I'd like Indy to go the solo route, but accept that it's an idea unlikely to come to life. This could be the sticking point, delaying any commitment to Indy V: KOTCS didn't gain a lasting young fan base. Therefore, is there still a big enough market for another movie beyond the dedicated fans at boards such as these?
 

Darth Vile

New member
Montana Smith said:
For me that's the special quality of this series of films. It's one of those rare occasions when we get to see an iconic character age, and finally accept their limitations.

It's a fact that the story would have to be tailored in such a way that Harrison can play the role convincingly. That's where the suspense and creepy mystery element would come in. Harrison's Indy is an engaging character even when not in full flight, and when it did come to action he can still use a gun, and he could still drive a car (or an aero sled!)
I think there is some definite mileage in seeing an older Indy. However, as someone who liked KOTCS, I'm not sure how much further you can take the idea. Although Ford has still got it, 'it' is less than it was... and I wouldn't want to see the character just fizzle out. If we want an older Indy, if we want to properly see that character coming to terms with his own mortality, we the have to except that it isn't going to be Raiders part 2 or even TOD. It's going to be something quite different, and something many people might not warm to. I personally think KOTCS was a taster of that.


Montana Smith said:
Again, it comes down to the writing.

In The Line of Fire dealt specifically with the aging hero idea. Clint Eastwood was a 63 year old actor playing a character struggling to keep up his more youthful colleagues in a very demanding job.

John Wayne was often surrounded by much younger actors, as you write, but he was always the main character, even when he was dying of cancer in The Shootist. He was engaging as the hero even well past his prime, but as you also implied, this is a difficult idea to sell to the general public.

The difference I think is that those movies you cite were dealing with a one off character i.e. no expectations/no previous frame of reference. Indy is already a cinematic icon. I don't think the problem with KOTCS was that Indy wasn't the focus (as he clearly was). I'm pretty sure Shia had as much screen time as Ron Howard did in The Shootist. For me, it's more around our expectations of what we want from an Indy movie. We've seen Indy in his prime/at his best. To then depict him coming to terms with his age/decrepitude/death... I'm not sure that's something I want to see in an Indiana Jones movie, nor in a James Bond movie (to cite a similar cinematic character). I'd rather just see him leaping from horses, fighting Nazi's and going off with the gal (and the occasional finding of a long lost relative etc.).

Interesting conversation by the way... :)
 
Last edited:

Montana Smith

Active member
Darth Vile said:
I think there is some definite mileage in seeing an older Indy. However, as someone who liked KOTCS, I'm not sure how much further you can take the idea. Although Ford has still got it, 'it' is less than it was... and I wouldn't want to see the character just fizzle out. If we want an older Indy, if we want to properly see that character coming to terms with his own mortality, we the have to except that it isn't going to be Raiders part 2 or even TOD. It's going to be something quite different, and something many people might not warm to. I personally think KOTCS was a taster of that.

The difference I think is that those movies you cite were dealing with a one off character i.e. no expectations/no previous frame of reference. Indy is already a cinematic icon. I don't think the problem with KOTCS was that Indy wasn't the focus (as he clearly was). I'm pretty sure Shia had as much screen time as Ron Howard did in The Shootist. For me, it's more around our expectations of what we want from an Indy movie. We've seen Indy in his prime/at his best. To then depict him coming to terms with his age/decrepitude/death... I'm not sure that's something I want to see in an Indiana Jones movie, nor in a James Bond movie (to cite a similar cinematic character). I'd rather just see him leaping from horses, fighting Nazi's and going off with the gal (and the occasional finding of a long lost relative etc.).

I've written previously that it might be best if Indy didn't return, didn't age any further, for fear that another movie would irrepairably destroy his iconic status. Yet, my need to see another movie in the series is overwhelming. It could well be a self-destructive need!

I also place myself in the "liked KOTCS" category, but am becoming more critical of its failings as times passes. The title of this thread serves to bring those failings into sharper focus.

When I wrote previously that it might be best that there wasn't an Indy V, it was from a standpoint that KOTCS finished on a high, with Indy retaining his fedora, not yet ready to give up his role to a young pretender.

However, I think Harrison needs to reassert that role once more, to try an recapture something of the magic of the original trilogy, but in a fashion where age is undeniably present, yet shown not to be a barrier to success: Indy survived on his wits as much as his athetlic abilities. Yet this is where the dilemma obviously arises. It isn't going to be Raiders part two, as you stated. It would be a film I'd like to see, but not one that the marketplace will probably accept.

Someone will likely have to take the Shia role. Someone who can convincingly take on the action hero stunts that we expect from an Indy movie. Indy will have to remain the dominant driving force primarily through his strength of character, knowledge and wits. Like an older Batman relying on a Robin character to assist him.

Darth Vile said:
Interesting conversation by the way... :)

Agreed! (y)

:hat:
 

Indy-Anna

New member
Montana Smith said:
I also place myself in the "liked KOTCS" category, but am becoming more critical of its failings as times passes. The title of this thread serves to bring those failings into sharper focus.

However, I think Harrison needs to reassert that role once more, to try an recapture something of the magic of the original trilogy, but in a fashion where age is undeniably present, yet shown not to be a barrier to success: Indy survived on his wits as much as his athetlic abilities. Yet this is where the dilemma obviously arises. It isn't going to be Raiders part two, as you stated. It would be a film I'd like to see, but not one that the marketplace will probably accept.

Someone will likely have to take the Shia role. Someone who can convincingly take on the action hero stunts that we expect from an Indy movie. Indy will have to remain the dominant driving force primarily through his strength of character, knowledge and wits. Like an older Batman relying on a Robin character to assist him.

I'll admit I liked to film too, but I've also become more critical of it as time goes by too. The feeling I get from the movie is that it was good, but it could've been better.

I also agree about Harrison needing to take back the role and try to reclaim some of that "magic" we lost in KOTCS. 'Cause even though he's getting older, he's still Indy. (Personally, I thought the old jokes in KOTCS got old (no pun intended) really quickly.)

As for the the Shia/younger sidekick role, I'm still up for the idea of Shortround returning, but I know that's never going to happen. Ah well, let's just hope that if they do cast someone else, he'll be better than Shia.
 
Top