General Indy 5 Thread - rumors and possibilities

Or maybe Indy will use a timemachine, travel back to 1951 and prevent his dad from dying...

Rocket Surgeon said:

During a crisis of conscience Grey Cloud hooks up Indy and he goes on a Vision Quest. Henry Sr steps through the mist...

"...junior?"

Click to expand...

Papa Jones said:

Or maybe Indy will use a timemachine, travel back to 1951 and prevent his dad from dying...

Click to expand...

Careful what you wish for (or even speculate). It could turn out to be Indy V...

Darth Vile said:

I think Lucas/Spielberg could easily write themselves out of that particular corner. For example, Henry Jones Sr might have been presumed dead/lost following a plane crash, avalanche, boat sinking etc. etc (take your pick). Not saying it's a good idea, or that they'd even do it that way... but I think it's easily written around if they wanted Connery back for a fifth...

Click to expand...

Very true. They could do this.
Although the book Indiana Jones the Ultimate Guide does say " passes away"
I would be more optomistic if it said "goes missing" or "presumed "deceased"
The Passes away statement seemes pretty definitive.
I really would think that they wouldn't have Indy go off and find his father AGAIN... it would just be a carbon copy of LC.
So the other possibilities mentioned are all more likely to happen...even Ugggg.... the time machine thingie

Rivers said:

Very true. They could do this.
Although the book Indiana Jones the Ultimate Guide does say " passes away"
I would be more optomistic if it said "goes missing" or "presumed "deceased"
The Passes away statement seemes pretty definitive.
I really would think that they wouldn't have Indy go off and find his father AGAIN... it would just be a carbon copy of LC.
So the other possibilities mentioned are all more likely to happen...even Ugggg.... the time machine thingie

Click to expand...

But maybe, that in the beginning of Indy V it will be told, how and under which circumstances and why Henry Sr. died...
and there will be left a riddle that Indy will solve finally in the early 60th.
The main plot of Indy 5.
But how I already wrote...MAYBE! Time is running and if Indy 5 isn't already on the schedule of George/Steven and Harrison Indy 5 is already just an unrealistic vision.

By the way: The first Iron Man was also in the movies in 2008 (like KotCS) and there we've got already a sequel and now it is fact, that the director of Part 3 is already confirmed: Shawn Black http://www.imdb.com/news/ni7842140/

Hanselation said:

But how I already wrote...MAYBE! Time is running and if Indy 5 isn't already on the schedule of George/Steven and Harrison Indy 5 is already just an unrealistic vision.

By the way: The first Iron Man was also in the movies in 2008 (like KotCS) and there we've got already a sequel and now it is fact, that the director of Part 3 is already confirmed: Shawn Black http://www.imdb.com/news/ni7842140/

Click to expand...

All very true. The only difference being is that Marvel probably realise that the window of opportunity for the Iron Man movies is circa 5 or 6 years... so they need to squeeze that particular asset in the shortest turnaround before interest dies. Indiana Jones, on the other hand, is as finite as Lucas/Spielberg and Ford are physically able. Wether they will be physically able to make another one remains to be seen... but good box office will always be (more than likely) guaranteed if they do.

Hanselation said:

Time is running and if Indy 5 isn't already on the schedule of George/Steven and Harrison Indy 5 is already just an unrealistic vision.

By the way: The first Iron Man was also in the movies in 2008 (like KotCS) and there we've got already a sequel and now it is fact, that the director of Part 3 is already confirmed: Shawn Black http://www.imdb.com/news/ni7842140/

Click to expand...

For what it's worth, I for one (and seemingly the only one) am not on the Iron Man bandwagon. At all. I'll take KOTCS over 3 Iron Man flicks. That being said, the amount of time it has taken post-OT for more Indy is ridiculous and depressing.

Indy's brother said:

For what it's worth, I for one (and seemingly the only one) am not on the Iron Man bandwagon. At all. I'll take KOTCS over 3 Iron Man flicks. That being said, the amount of time it has taken post-OT for more Indy is ridiculous and depressing.

Click to expand...

Not the only one... I totally agree. I thought the first one was ok, but the 2nd was just typical depressing Hollywood sausage machine movie making. I personally thought KOTCS (with all its flaws) had more imagination and charm in the first 30 mins than both Iron Man movies put together.

Darth Vile said:

I personally thought KOTCS (with all its flaws) had more imagination and charm in the first 30 mins than both Iron Man movies put together.

Click to expand...

The first thirty-odd minutes of KOTCS did have charm and imagination. After Doom Town it began to lose both, and it therefore lost a lot of promise. Characters and situations were set up to be exploited, and for some reason they weren't. The charm of the relationships in ROTLA and TLC didn't materialize. The connections between characters were as hollow as with Indy's companions in TOD.

That's why I'm not in a hurry to see Indy V made. Nineteen years of waiting produced KOTCS, and I really expected the creators to have been more sympathetic, and hope it isn't the shape of things to come.

Montana Smith said:

The first thirty-odd minutes of KOTCS did have charm and imagination. After Doom Town it began to lose both, and it therefore lost a lot of promise. Characters and situations were set up to be exploited, and for some reason they weren't. The charm of the relationships in ROTLA and TLC didn't materialize. The connections between characters were as hollow as with Indy's companions in TOD.

That's why I'm not in a hurry to see Indy V made. Nineteen years of waiting produced KOTCS, and I really expected the creators to have been more sympathetic, and hope it isn't the shape of things to come.

Click to expand...

For me it was the final 3rd i.e. from Akator onwards, which let the movie down. There was neither a dramatic plot/character build (as we get in TLC) nor was there a knock out action section to top the movie a la TOD. That's the shame for me because up until Akator, I think KOTCS works rather well (although all of it is still, IMHO, passe/old fashioned as far as modern action movies are concerned).

I don't relish the idea of any possible Indy V purely because I just don't think Spielberg no longer has the knack of pushing the boundaries of an action movie (perhaps that's a younger directors bag?). However, I still stand by the view that an average Indy movie (i.e. KOTCS) is still better than most Iron Men, Xmen, Pirates OTC and James Bond et al sequels.

Darth Vile said:

I don't relish the idea of any possible Indy V purely because I just don't think Spielberg no longer has the knack of pushing the boundaries of an action movie (perhaps that's a younger directors bag?).

Click to expand...

Let Tarantino or Rodriguez have a go. That should liven up proceedings and also raise the certificiate to clear the kids out the way. (So no more swinging with the monkeys!)

Darth Vile said:

However, I still stand by the view that an average Indy movie (i.e. KOTCS) is still better than most Iron Men, Xmen, Pirates OTC and James Bond et al sequels.

Click to expand...

They all have their place and their appeal, but an Indy film is always going to be in the shadow of Raiders. The first movie was the magic that gave life to the series, and matching it was always going to be a thankless task.

I still prefer the vision they achieved in the '80s. Not that the character of Indy doesn't travel well, but more that his creators aren't in the same frame of mind that they used to be. Lucas and Spielberg have a different outlook now. There are things that they don't want their leading characters to do any more, and places they don't want them to go. That's what I was trying to say in the blu-ray thread. Lucas looks like he'd rather have cleaner cut heroes, and regrets having them do the darker deeds. Spielberg in turn removed the guns from E.T., reducing the threat level.

That for me doesn't bode well for another Indy movie.

Montana Smith said:

Let Tarantino or Rodriguez have a go. That should liven up proceedings and also raise the certificiate to clear the kids out the way. (So no more swinging with the monkeys!)



They all have their place and their appeal, but an Indy film is always going to be in the shadow of Raiders. The first movie was the magic that gave life to the series, and matching it was always going to be a thankless task.

I still prefer the vision they achieved in the '80s. Not that the character of Indy doesn't travel well, but more that his creators aren't in the same frame of mind that they used to be. Lucas and Spielberg have a different outlook now. There are things that they don't want their leading characters to do any more, and places they don't want them to go. That's what I was trying to say in the blu-ray thread. Lucas looks like he'd rather have cleaner cut heroes, and regrets having them do the darker deeds. Spielberg in turn removed the guns from E.T., reducing the threat level.

That for me doesn't bode well for another Indy movie.

Click to expand...

While I agree with all of this, a few things. I would love to see a younger directors' takes on Indy (Rodriguez is a crazyawesome idea), but it'll never happen save a reboot. I can't imagine GL, SS, or HF doing one without the others on board. If Indy 5 ever happens, it will simply be whatever it is, regardless of what we would prefer. On a certain level I've accepted that, because after all, we'll always have the OT. Maybe it's my morbid curiosity getting the better of me, but part of my interest in Indy 5 is to see wether it will be a triumphant return to form or a dismal confirmation that there is no coming back for Indy in the hands of his current caretakers. Either way, it would be near impossible for some of the old magic to not to creep in and give us a shiny glimpse (or two, or three) of what we love about the character and Spielberg's flair for storytelling. Even if it's as divisive as KOTCS, it's enough of a reason for me to be there. It's my duty as a fan to at least give the dynamic trio a shot at redemption, they've certainly earned that. If a 5th is no better than the last, I'll admit defeat......but I vhant to know.....

Montana Smith said:

Let Tarantino or Rodriguez have a go. That should liven up proceedings and also raise the certificiate to clear the kids out the way. (So no more swinging with the monkeys!)

Click to expand...

I agree? Indiana Jones given to someone who can direct more contemporary high-octane action would certainly be interesting to see.

Montana Smith said:

I still prefer the vision they achieved in the '80s. Not that the character of Indy doesn't travel well, but more that his creators aren't in the same frame of mind that they used to be. Lucas and Spielberg have a different outlook now. There are things that they don't want their leading characters to do any more, and places they don't want them to go. That's what I was trying to say in the blu-ray thread. Lucas looks like he'd rather have cleaner cut heroes, and regrets having them do the darker deeds. Spielberg in turn removed the guns from E.T., reducing the threat level.

Click to expand...

Indy's brother said:

Maybe it's my morbid curiosity getting the better of me, but part of my interest in Indy 5 is to see wether it will be a triumphant return to form or a dismal confirmation that there is no coming back for Indy in the hands of his current caretakers. Either way, it would be near impossible for some of the old magic to not to creep in and give us a shiny glimpse (or two, or three) of what we love about the character and Spielberg's flair for storytelling. Even if it's as divisive as KOTCS, it's enough of a reason for me to be there. It's my duty as a fan to at least give the dynamic trio a shot at redemption, they've certainly earned that. If a 5th is no better than the last, I'll admit defeat......but I vhant to know.....

Click to expand...

I think that was the nub of my argument... in that? drop KOTCS into the 80?s (with a younger Ford), or alternatively if there had never been the first 3 movies, I think there would be much more consensus amongst fans that KOTCS was a ?good? Indy movie (or at least a solid/good action adventure movie). I firmly believe that the Indiana Jones movies success isn?t dependant on the gore/violence quota per se (although I do understand the requirement for the movies to have some ?edge?), but rather the fact that the first 3 (specifically Raiders and TOD) had no equal when it came to high-octane action. In the action and set piece stakes, the Indy and Star Wars movies of the 70?s/80?s raised the bar and set the pace? there was no equal. Unfortunately, younger directors have usurped Spielberg over the past 20 years. All he can now do is follow others (or repeat his own style). That?s why, for me anyhow, KOTCS would have been great if it had been made shortly after TLC, but with a 20-year gap, stylistically it?s now a bit pedestrian (even if still imaginative/intelligent). I think this is the natural lifecycle of artists i.e. it?s usually the younger generations who find new ways to emote/create? it?s the older ones who inspire the younger ones to push boundaries.

So for me it?s less about frame of mind/changing sensibilities of Lucas/Spielberg and more to do with the application of (or lack of) new styles and techniques in getting what?s on the page onto the screen.

I certainly see your points DV, they are all valid. As far as a full reboot (which as I stated previously is the only way I could see any of the big three bowing out), I don't really mind at all.....as long as I can believe that Harry doesn't have any more Indy-juice left in him. And I'm not there yet. Spielberg saying that Ford was the "secret weapon" in the Indy films was right on track for me. After they either wrap the Ford version up (which I'm not convinced has happened), or run the Ford version irreversibly into the ground (which I'll admit, some already believe), then I don't really care what happens. A future recast of Dr. Jones would be an interesting curiosity for me, but I don't need the franchise to continue after Ford enough to really want that. I suppose I'm not really bringing anything new by saying any of this......but I guess I can't help myself.

Indy's brother said:

Spielberg saying that Ford was the "secret weapon" in the Indy films was right on track for me. After they either wrap the Ford version up (which I'm not convinced has happened), or run the Ford version irreversibly into the ground (which I'll admit, some already believe), then I don't really care what happens. A future recast of Dr. Jones would be an interesting curiosity for me, but I don't need the franchise to continue after Ford enough to really want that.

Click to expand...

Yep - Agreed.

Montana Smith said:

Let Tarantino or Rodriguez have a go. That should liven up proceedings and also raise the certificiate to clear the kids out the way. (So no more swinging with the monkeys!)



They all have their place and their appeal, but an Indy film is always going to be in the shadow of Raiders. The first movie was the magic that gave life to the series, and matching it was always going to be a thankless task.

I still prefer the vision they achieved in the '80s. Not that the character of Indy doesn't travel well, but more that his creators aren't in the same frame of mind that they used to be. Lucas and Spielberg have a different outlook now. There are things that they don't want their leading characters to do any more, and places they don't want them to go. That's what I was trying to say in the blu-ray thread. Lucas looks like he'd rather have cleaner cut heroes, and regrets having them do the darker deeds. Spielberg in turn removed the guns from E.T., reducing the threat level.

That for me doesn't bode well for another Indy movie.

Click to expand...

holding movies up to raiders is unfair. you can pretty much say every action movie made after raiders is a shadow of it. especially in an indiana jones forum.

All is fair in love and war and holding movies up to Raiders is not only fair but essential. What are you going to compare proceeding movies to - inferior ones or the best? Raiders is the equivalent of Olympic gold. Its achievements are always to be held up against would-be successors and competitors. This is the nature of canon making.

Mickiana said:

All is fair in love and war and holding movies up to Raiders is not only fair but essential. What are you going to compare proceeding movies to - inferior ones or the best? Raiders is the equivalent of Olympic gold. Its achievements are always to be held up against would-be successors and competitors. This is the nature of canon making.

Click to expand...

I think unfair (or unhelpful) in that we tend to measure Raiders quality in terms of our emotional response to it as a historic piece of cinema. There is nothing wrong in using Raiders and Star Wars as a yard stick for something that has the ability to be culturally significant, but I don't think it's necessarily a useful measure of a movies quality per se. For example, Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band is righty regarded as one of the best, most influential albums of all time. However, there are hundreds of albums (both before and after Sgt. Pepper) that contain better songs, better musicianship etc. etc. Sgt. Pepper has carved its place in history specifically because of what it did in 1967. Technically speaking, as an album, it's been bettered many times since (even by The Beatles)... but that does not alter its musical/cultural significance. So, for an extreme example, stating that Lady Gaga's new album is no Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band would serve little purpose, as it could never be that (unless we went back in time)...

Just had twenty minutes on the phone with Marion Ravenwood. I tell you, if I was thirty years older. Indy 5 is most likely happening.

Click to expand...

http://twitter.com/benmckelvey/status/37636242694737920

Karen Allen, the star of the first and most recent Indiana Jones movies, says she will be on stage at Armageddon taking questions about the continuing adventures of the movies' namesake as well as her turns in Animal House and Starman. [...] As for the fifth Indiana Jones film … ''There is a script being worked on and there seems to be agreement on the core of the story. From what I hear, Harrison [Ford] and George [Lucas] and Steven [Spielberg] like the core of the story.'' Allen, seen here in the first of the series in 1981, admits that her acting career doesn't compare to that of Indiana Jonesco-star Ford, but questions whether he has been more ''successful'' than her. ''In my 20s acting was all that I was about, but when I had my son I kind of realised that there's more to life. How many blockbuster movies do you have to be in?''

Click to expand...

http://www.smh.com.au/national/the-diary/a-big-day-for-nudity-20110217-1ayas.html?skin=text-only

She'll be there on March 5th: http://www.armageddonexpo.com/au/special-events/ade

I wish those quotes from Karen included a phrase such as "things are near completion".

I soo want an Indy 5!!!
No matter the bashing that genre film snobs hurl upon KOTCS it's obviously liked by the mainstream. It's been in the Netflix 100 since it's release on DVD over a year ago. Currently at #53

Captain Craig said:

It's been in the Netflix 100 since it's release on DVD over a year ago. Currently at #53

Click to expand...

That's a great find, Cap'n! Got a link for that?