Indy 5 news 2012

EddyW

EddyW

Active member
My comment wasn't meant to be taken literally of course, all I'm saying is they're just throwing power talk at you to convince you that this is the right moment in time to lay down your money. Like the media distributors have been doing since forever.

http://indianajones.wikia.com/wiki/The_Complete_Adventures_of_Indiana_Jones
scan0018-2.jpg
 
The Stranger

The Stranger

Member
Henry W Jones said:
This comment is silly. Of course they wouldn't call it "who knows if......." All they would have to do is call it "the adventures of......." That word complete says so much in my eyes.
Click to expand...


When they released the DVD box set, back in 2003, it was labeled as "The Complete Saga". It really is just a matter of marketing.
 
I

Indy's brother

New member
The Stranger said:
When they released the DVD box set, back in 2003, it was labeled as "The Complete Saga". It really is just a matter of marketing.
Click to expand...

I no longer think that Indy 5 is going to happen, but your logic is completely sound. The wording on a dvd box mean nothing in regards to future installments.
 
Hanselation

Hanselation

New member
Does someone know, who is responsible for the decission to choose this unfavorable cover picture...
MV5BMTY4Mjg0NjIxOV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwMTM2NTI3MQ@@._V1._SX214_CR0,0,214,314_.jpg

.... from Harrison for the related IMDB-Page?
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000148/

It feels so different from his look! For me even on newer pictures he looks younger...and could still be Indiana Jones in a next installment.
 
I

IndyForever

Active member
Its unlikely to get made now anyway but Shia is not going to be part of it (thankfully).

http://entertainment.nbcnews.com/_n...ia-labeouf-im-done-with-hollywood-movies?lite

"The actor "deeply regrets" his negative comments about "Indiana Jones" revealing they ruptured his relationship with Steven Spielberg. "He told me there's a time to be a human being and have an opinion, and there's a time to sell cars," he recalls. "It brought me freedom, but it also killed my spirits because this was a dude I looked up to like a sensei." "
 
kongisking

kongisking

Active member
IndyForever said:
Its unlikely to get made now anyway but Shia is not going to be part of it (thankfully).

http://entertainment.nbcnews.com/_n...ia-labeouf-im-done-with-hollywood-movies?lite

"The actor "deeply regrets" his negative comments about "Indiana Jones" revealing they ruptured his relationship with Steven Spielberg. "He told me there's a time to be a human being and have an opinion, and there's a time to sell cars," he recalls. "It brought me freedom, but it also killed my spirits because this was a dude I looked up to like a sensei." "
Click to expand...

Good Lord...

Steven must be really furious!

I actually think this kinda sucks, as I did like the Mutt character, and looked forward to seeing the continuation of his character development.

Poor Shia. :(
 
I

Indy's brother

New member
kongisking said:
Poor Shia. :(
Click to expand...

I disagree. While I don't think that Shia's comments alone were the death-knell for Indy 5, I don't think they helped one bit. Ford, Steven, and George are all going soft with the family vibe in the Indyverse. Then the actor that plays Indiana Jones' SON says some really out of turn stuff. He pisses off the one person on earth who has any influence on George Lucas at all, and that pretty much kills the plot of any future installment that (which should be obvious to anyone who has been paying attention at all) would delve deeper into Indy's relationship with his son. This makes me think that this rift could be impossible to reconcile, preventing the creation of a script that satisfies all the requirements of the creative parties involved. Of course, I am just a speculative speck of dirt on the lens that we see the future through. I could be way wrong. Of course, I could also be a chinese fighter pilot, too. Shia didn't kill this franchise outright, but his comments sound to me as if he may have hammered a few key nails into it's coffin.

Oxely said, "How much of human life is lost in waiting." I say, how much of this franchise's life is being lost in waiting for egos to subside. Spielberg has said himself that Indy belongs to everyone, and that they are his caretakers. Letting Indy get old and gather dust for 19 years is not taking care of him, and letting the squabbles of millionaire egos hinder the adventures of a character that supposedly belongs to the common public doesn't sound fair, either. Hire a damn writer. A good one that gets Indy and loves this franchise enough to write through your petty little problems. Give Indy the proper, dignified, cornball-free sendoff that he deserves and give this franchise a true end. We may not be as precious and lucrative as the Star Wars crowd, but we are loyal enough, and still deserve it.
 
Last edited:
Olliana

Olliana

New member
In my book it's better to have an all new sidekick for Indy anyway, simply because it's custom and practice that a sidekick doesn't appear two films in a row.
Also, Indy's father hasn't been seen in Skull, so I'm okay with leaving Indy's son out in five. The last Indy flick should be all about Indy himself anyway and not about a youngster getting his balls flogged. I don't wanna see others helping Indy out, but the other way round.
 
I

IndyForever

Active member
No real news but Spielberg is not ready to shoot the final sunset on Indy 5 just yet:

"Q.

As long as we?re talking about the Indy movies: with your longtime producing partner Kathleen Kennedy now a co-chair at Lucasfilm, is this the time to start thinking about ?Indiana Jones 5??

A.

I?m afraid to think about it. Because if I think about it, I?m really going to want to do it. But it?s not up to me ? it?s up to George. So the person who needs to be thinking about it is George, not me. And I?ve given George my pledge that if he wants to write a fifth Indiana Jones movie, I?m his man to direct it. But it?s all up to him, and I don?t put any pressure on him. And if he decides that another one is warranted, I?ll be happy to direct it.
"

http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2...ark-to-receive-imax-re-release/?smid=tw-share
 
kongisking

kongisking

Active member
Indy's brother said:
I disagree. While I don't think that Shia's comments alone were the death-knell for Indy 5, I don't think they helped one bit. Ford, Steven, and George are all going soft with the family vibe in the Indyverse. Then the actor that plays Indiana Jones' SON says some really out of turn stuff. He pisses off the one person on earth who has any influence on George Lucas at all, and that pretty much kills the plot of any future installment that (which should be obvious to anyone who has been paying attention at all) would delve deeper into Indy's relationship with his son. This makes me think that this rift could be impossible to reconcile, preventing the creation of a script that satisfies all the requirements of the creative parties involved. Of course, I am just a speculative speck of dirt on the lens that we see the future through. I could be way wrong. Of course, I could also be a chinese fighter pilot, too. Shia didn't kill this franchise outright, but his comments sound to me as if he may have hammered a few key nails into it's coffin.

Oxely said, "How much of human life is lost in waiting." I say, how much of this franchise's life is being lost in waiting for egos to subside. Spielberg has said himself that Indy belongs to everyone, and that they are his caretakers. Letting Indy get old and gather dust for 19 years is not taking care of him, and letting the squabbles of millionaire egos hinder the adventures of a character that supposedly belongs to the common public doesn't sound fair, either. Hire a damn writer. A good one that gets Indy and loves this franchise enough to write through your petty little problems. Give Indy the proper, dignified, cornball-free sendoff that he deserves and give this franchise a true end. We may not be as precious and lucrative as the Star Wars crowd, but we are loyal enough, and still deserve it.
Click to expand...

I'm just saying I feel bad for Shia, for having the courage to speak his mind about his own work and performance, only for it to destroy his relationship with one of his idols.
 
Toht's Arm

Toht's Arm

Active member
IndyForever said:
No real news but Spielberg is not ready to shoot the final sunset on Indy 5 just yet:

"Q.

As long as we?re talking about the Indy movies: with your longtime producing partner Kathleen Kennedy now a co-chair at Lucasfilm, is this the time to start thinking about ?Indiana Jones 5??

A.

I?m afraid to think about it. Because if I think about it, I?m really going to want to do it. But it?s not up to me ? it?s up to George. So the person who needs to be thinking about it is George, not me. And I?ve given George my pledge that if he wants to write a fifth Indiana Jones movie, I?m his man to direct it. But it?s all up to him, and I don?t put any pressure on him. And if he decides that another one is warranted, I?ll be happy to direct it.
"

http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2...ark-to-receive-imax-re-release/?smid=tw-share
Click to expand...

It's funny how keen Spielberg is to make another - possibly to make up for the shortfalls of the last one? It's weird to think both Ford and Spielberg are chomping at the bit whilst Lucas...does whatever Lucas does in his spare time...
 
I

IndyForever

Active member
Toht's Arm said:
It's funny how keen Spielberg is to make another - possibly to make up for the shortfalls of the last one? It's weird to think both Ford and Spielberg are chomping at the bit whilst Lucas...does whatever Lucas does in his spare time...
Click to expand...
Yet Lucas said in his Bloomberg TV interview in late april the other 2 were hard to please so who to believe! I hope Spielberg decides next month when the IMAX & Blurays come out to seriously arrange something with Lucas to move it along as why does Lucas have to come up with the story just because he did the other 4 why not let Lucas be a story consultant & let Spielberg/Ford have more say on it if Lucas is retired & not that interested anymore.

I am sure they can find a unique story set in asia/europe & other more remote parts of the world but Spielberg does not like travelling anymore so thats another part of the problem he won't go to the middle east & China do not like him after he boycotted the 2008 olympics so that rules them out.

Its no wonder they cannot find a story when there are so many restrictions in place aleady from Spielberg & Lucas is bored of trying to please Spielberg+Ford as they throw out his more outlandish ideas it seems unlikely to get made unless Spielberg compromises a bit as Ford will shoot almost whatever Lucas/Spielberg come up with.
 
Brooke Logan

Brooke Logan

New member
kongisking said:
I'm just saying I feel bad for Shia, for having the courage to speak his mind about his own work and performance, only for it to destroy his relationship with one of his idols.
Click to expand...

I don't remember Shia's exact words about Indy 4, but I did agree with him about it. I don't remember it being anything that terrible that he said, just that it was pretty honest and how I felt about the movie.

I know there are people who liked the movie but myself and my family, fans of the Indy movies since childhood, did not like the fourth one. Something was just off and I can't put my finger on what it was.

Frankly I think they should have let Last Crusade be the end of the films. It was a perfect ending. It's not easy to make sequels be as good as an original, especially when the original was as awesome as Raiders. However, I think Temple and Last Crusade were fantastic sequels and were almost as good as Raiders, if not as good. That's rare.

So when you get the kind of magic that you had with that trilogy, it's not a good idea to push it and hope you're going to keep making that kind of magic again. I'm not saying they shouldn't try, but you run the risk of it backfiring, which it did in the case of Indy 4 imo.

BUT, on that note:

Mr. Spielberg, if you do make Indy 5, please, please, please put your beautiful wife Kate Capshaw in some scenes!!!!
 
Dr.Jonesy

Dr.Jonesy

Well-known member
Brooke Logan said:
I don't remember Shia's exact words about Indy 4, but I did agree with him about it. I don't remember it being anything that terrible that he said, just that it was pretty honest and how I felt about the movie.

I know there are people who liked the movie but myself and my family, fans of the Indy movies since childhood, did not like the fourth one. Something was just off and I can't put my finger on what it was.

Frankly I think they should have let Last Crusade be the end of the films. It was a perfect ending. It's not easy to make sequels be as good as an original, especially when the original was as awesome as Raiders. However, I think Temple and Last Crusade were fantastic sequels and were almost as good as Raiders, if not as good. That's rare.

So when you get the kind of magic that you had with that trilogy, it's not a good idea to push it and hope you're going to keep making that kind of magic again. I'm not saying they shouldn't try, but you run the risk of it backfiring, which it did in the case of Indy 4 imo.
Click to expand...

Shia was catering to internet fanboy niche groups that are serial-whiners that took over after the movie had been out for awhile. He can talk about his own performance, but he phoned up Spielberg and told him "You dropped the ball" and told the press about it. He told the press that "Steven needed to hear that" which ultimately would rub Steven the wrong way as it should.

The only "magic" that 'Temple' and 'Crusade' has is in the nostalgic factor. 'Temple' is not a good sequel to 'Raiders'. 'Raiders' changed cinema in some capacity and 'Temple' confused everyone. 'Crusade' was great but was received quite mixed back then. No sequel to 'Raiders' ever began to approach the impact of it. And it's not like that's impossible, as 'Empire Strikes Back' is in the realm of 'A New Hope'. I notice this with new albums from bands I love; the newest album doesn't quite feel like it fits in until a few years have passed and it blends in with the rest of the discography. If you can't put your finger on what's missing, then maybe there isn't anything missing other than the good memories you had with the other films that only time can bring.

The fact that a film(s) has "magic" for you takes years to set in. I love the Batman trilogy by Chris Nolan, but I don't feel the magic of it like I will in 10 years. Feelings like that take years to set into a fan's psyche. And as far as 'Crusade' being the end, well I've heard that from a few people but these people were begging for Indy IV for a long time. And there are droves of people begging for an Indy V. Damned if you do, damned if you don't I say. Maybe the disappointed fans should be careful what they wish for.

The 'magic' of something is personal and not universal.


And just a thought; it's harder to make a sequel when some fans have over-inflated the quality of the two films before it and/or have long since forgotten/glossed over their flaws. Not to mention romanticizing the films. I didn't notice how much I glossed over 'Temple' and 'Crusade's flaws until I saw 'Kingdom' and hurled 100 criticisms at it after my first viewing since I hated it so; then I had a moment where I put all my Indy IV criticisms onto the previous sequels and realized they suffered from those things, as well. Nostalgia and revisionist history kept me from noticing, though.

People asked for Indy IV - They made the film and it was good for most people, hence why we get people asking for Indy V. Will we get it? Probably not but you can't fault filmmakers for following something that most people are asking for IF they do make it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Brooke Logan

Brooke Logan

New member
Dr.Jonesy said:
Shia was catering to internet fanboy niche groups that are serial-whiners that took over after the movie had been out for awhile. He can talk about his own performance, but he phoned up Spielberg and told him "You dropped the ball" and told the press about it. He told the press that "Steven needed to hear that" which ultimately would rub Steven the wrong way as it should.
Click to expand...

Maybe Shia just didn't like the film when he saw it. I don't think he would want to cater to internet fans over Hollywood directors. And as far as what he told Mr. Spielberg, maybe it isn't nice but then again don't directors need to get a little criticism if it's necessary to help them improve? Nobody likes criticism but I call it constructive criticism.

Also, I hadn't liked Indy IV even before I saw how anyone felt about it on the 'net, I just knew it didn't seem good to me like the others had. I only liked Cate Blanchett. And my niece also didn't like it (she said "they tried too hard") and just yesterday by coincidence my sister brought up having seen the movie with her on-off boyfriend and she said "I didn't like it" and almost apologetically to me, which wasn't necessary because I don't like it either.

A few scenes here and there are okay and I don't hate some of the stuff others do, like the aliens, the prairie dogs, the fridge scene, the ants and even the monkeys (though I do laugh at Mutt swinging through the vines, yes that was over the top).

Not that I think Spielberg's directing was the problem. I thought it was flat characters and a not good plot/script.
The only "magic" that 'Temple' and 'Crusade' has is in the nostalgic factor.
Click to expand...
I liked Temple as soon as I saw it as a little girl and I can watch it over and over and still think it's great. I saw Crusade when I was 20 and I had the same love for it I did for the others, and also can see that one over and over again.

I liked IV a little better after seeing it a second time, but it's not one I'd bother watching over and over like the other three.
people were begging for Indy IV for a long time. And there are droves of people begging for an Indy V. Damned if you do, damned if you don't I say. Maybe the disappointed fans should be careful what they wish for.
Click to expand...

I wasn't hoping for a IV, I was worried about the idea of a new film because I thought they ended the trilogy so beautifully and didn't think a 4th film was necessary.

But now I want a V so we can get a better story than IV, and get to see some old characters we didn't get to see in IV. Heck, if all Indy's other sidekicks can be brought back, I want the Temple ones back so their fans can get that treat that fans of Sallah, Marion, Brody got.:)

I didn't notice how much I glossed over 'Temple' and 'Crusade's flaws until I saw 'Kingdom' and hurled 100 criticisms at it after my first viewing since I hated it so
Click to expand...

I can't find any flaws with Temple and Crusade, personally.;) Well, my only gripe about Temple is that it's a prequel and I think it should be a sequel. Since in Raiders, Indy is skeptical of the supernatural at first but in Temple he clearly witnesses it.
Click to expand...
 
Dr.Jonesy

Dr.Jonesy

Well-known member
Brooke Logan said:
Maybe Shia just didn't like the film when he saw it. I don't think he would want to cater to internet fans over Hollywood directors. And as far as what he told Mr. Spielberg, maybe it isn't nice but then again don't directors need to get a little criticism if it's necessary to help them improve? Nobody likes criticism but I call it constructive criticism.

I liked Temple as soon as I saw it as a little girl and I can watch it over and over and still think it's great. I saw Crusade when I was 20 and I had the same love for it I did for the others, and also can see that one over and over again.

I liked IV a little better after seeing it a second time, but it's not one I'd bother watching over and over like the other three.

I can't find any flaws with Temple and Crusade, personally.;) Well, my only gripe about Temple is that it's a prequel and I think it should be a sequel. Since in Raiders, Indy is skeptical of the supernatural at first but in Temple he clearly witnesses it.
Click to expand...

Shia defended the film when it got some fan critiques in late 2008 and then pulled the stunt in 2010 of slamming it to promote 'Wall Street II'. If you want to critique a director, slamming him in the press is NOT the way to do it. You cannot blame Steven for finding that f'd up. And doing it to a film that did very well with critics and filmgoers/fans was also not smart.

I guess you were in the minority of not wanting a IV, just ask Steven or watch any press from 1990-2005 and see everyone asking for one. I understand why you didn't want a IV or were cautious. But still, Harrison got the ball rolling since the fanbase wanted it.

And yes, you liked 'Temple' as a kid and kept watching it. If you saw it for the first time as an adult in like I did, you wouldn't have been as kind to it or ignorant of its flaws/shortcomings. Over the years you don't notice the flaws as much. If you saw 'Kingdom' as a little girl, you'd be watching it again and again for years and I know it'd stand up for you.

There is many things wrong with 'Temple' and 'Crusade'. You may gloss over them or not care, but they still exist.

Brooke Logan said:
I can't find any flaws with Temple and Crusade, personally.;) Well, my only gripe about Temple is that it's a prequel and I think it should be a sequel. Since in Raiders, Indy is skeptical of the supernatural at first but in Temple he clearly witnesses it.
Click to expand...

:eek:

Seriously? ANY flaws? Do excuse my generalization, but that sounds like denial or blind rose tinted goggles to me. If you can pick apart 'Kingdom' whilst retaining the audacity to say that the previous two had no flaws...well I won't touch on that insanity. Pardon me for finding you biased against 'Kingdom' due to the fact that you view the previous sequels as without flaw.

Not trying to debate...just sayin'.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top