TheRaider.net
 

Go Back   The Raven > The Films > Indiana Jones 5
User Name
Password

View Poll Results: Pick up to 3 locales you'd like to see in Indy V, not necessarily as a group
Africa, west and/or central 5 20.83%
Africa, southern and/or east 2 8.33%
Oceania, including Australia 6 25.00%
the Caribbean and/or central America 5 20.83%
East Asia, including China, Japan, and Korea 12 50.00%
southeast Asia, including Indonesia 8 33.33%
Russia and central Asia 6 25.00%
northern Europe, including the British Isles and Scandinavia 6 25.00%
the Arctic or Antarctic 11 45.83%
someplace else! 2 8.33%
the Middle East or the Mediterranean, again 1 4.17%
South America or the US, again 2 8.33%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 24. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 11-28-2016, 12:22 PM   #51
Attila the Professor
Moderator
 
Attila the Professor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 6,384
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoo
Funny. No jungle stuff but you want Central Africa or British Honduras. No desert but you want Marrakesh in Morocco. Maybe Indy 5 should be set in the Arctic without showing any snow?

You raise good points, and I've skirted falling into the same trap you suggest, what with my affinity for a West African scenario that would almost certainly entail a visit to Timbuktu, in the Sahel. (Also, for that matter, a city that likely can't be filmed in, but if memory serves Venice is the only place in the series thus far that has played itself.)

But Senegal, Ghana, and Nigeria, to name three that, to my knowledge, could be suitable for filming, offer tropical grasslands of a sort largely not explored yet. (The Mayapore village is similar, but soon gives way to a rainforest again.)



Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn
One drawback of tapping into Finnish mythologies is the lack of tangible MacGuffins. Well, the stories are full of powerful magical items like the lyra (or kantele, as we call it) of Väinämöinen, but sending Indy after something like that would still feel kind of obscure - from the global audience's POV, I mean. It'd take some infodumping to get people up to speed, and - generally speaking - less time spent infodumping, the better.

Well, there is ONE that's majorly obvious, it pretty much shows up every time somebody writes contemporary fiction about the subject, and for that reason it feels beaten to death. But again, maybe it's just me, and it'd actually be fresh to most people not so versed on this stuff.

I found the artifact in question, which Wikipedia suggests is similar to both some versions of the Grail and Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom's treatment of the Sankara stone as something that affected the well-being of its village. Though that's not all it does...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wikipedia
The Sampo has been interpreted in many ways: a world pillar or world tree, a compass or astrolabe, a chest containing a treasure, a Byzantine coin die, a decorated Vendel period shield, a Christian relic, etc. In the Kalevala, compiler Lönnrot interpreted it to be a quern or mill of some sort that made flour, salt, and gold out of thin air. The world pillar hypothesis, originally developed by historian of religions Uno Harva and the linguist Eemil Nestor Setälä in the early 20th century, is the most widely accepted one.

As someone entirely unfamiliar with the Sampo until 5 minutes ago, it sounds like an artifact that can operate on some different thematic territory than what we've had up to now in the film series, though does trade on the omphalos, or navel of the world, idea that Rob MacGregor's novels returned to time and again. Indiana Jones and the Center of the World?

As for exposition time, I think Raiders and Last Crusade probably spent more time on straight description of what their MacGuffins were than the other 2, despite working with more familiar objects, but even if that's true, your point stands.
Attila the Professor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2016, 09:14 PM   #52
Finn
Moderator
 
Finn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Finland
Posts: 8,880
Quote:
Originally Posted by Attila the Professor
I found the artifact in question, which Wikipedia suggests is similar to both some versions of the Grail and Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom's treatment of the Sankara stone as something that affected the well-being of its village. Though that's not all it does...
That's the one. Didn't want to just spell it out, because I figured it's a good way to see whether it's really as obvious as I thought.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Attila the Professor
As someone entirely unfamiliar with the Sampo until 5 minutes ago, it sounds like an artifact that can operate on some different thematic territory than what we've had up to now in the film series, though does trade on the omphalos, or navel of the world, idea that Rob MacGregor's novels returned to time and again. Indiana Jones and the Center of the World?
I actually have to disagree with Wikipedia about what it calls its "most widely accepted" interpretation. Well, it may be correct for scholarly circles, but around 90% of the time it appears in fiction, it very much follows the Lönnrotian interpretation. In other words, it's simply a machine that can create riches out of nothing (most commonly gold, salt and grain) - not unlike the Horn of Plenty. If you asked a random Finn to describe it to you, this is what s/he would most likely say. And were it to be used as a MacGuffin in a feature film aimed for all audiences around the world, the odds are it would be depicted like that.

Probably not the least of reasons for people going with Lönnrot is that it sure is exposition-friendly. Makes it possible to explain in two sentences what it is and what it does. Though it would make a nice twist I suppose - make it appear as if our hero was after a very tangible artifact, then reveal it to be something else altogether in the end.
Finn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2017, 12:38 AM   #53
Joe Brody
IndyFan
 
Joe Brody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Sweetest Place on Earth
Posts: 2,543
Quote:
Originally Posted by Attila the Professor
I am interested in the question of the sorts of places that this fifth film could go that would broaden Indy's world and, to a lesser extent, possibly broaden an audience's too, giving them a story set in a place where we mightn't expect, or mightn't even know what it's like.

You tee this up so nicely!

First, I qualify my response: I can't say I have read all of the posts in this thread (and none of the links), so I apologize for any redundancy.


First, a word or two on academic environments
I will start by echoing (at least Olliana) the sentiment that we will NOT see college scenes. In my view, there was too much college in CS and those scenes were the most inert part of the film (even with Mutt's cycle scene). I bet Spielberg and Kennedy nix any college environments to help avoid the CS taint. Two possible exceptions: (1) A Mad-Men-esque '60's style modernism campus, like Mies van der Rohe's Illinois Institue of Technology, would be a compelling backdrop to show Indy 'out-of-time' or (more interestingly) keeping up with the times and actually awakening liberal global thinking in his young beef-fed, crew-cut American students so they don't end up being 'goose-stepping morons.' (2) Oxford -- specifically a great space like the Natural History Museum. I think 1960's UK, with the young Beatles, could be a location -- and an old Indy teaching in an old Victorian building to young English Mod students could be an interesting dynamic that would 'broaden' the Indy-verse.

Location 'Logic'
I think there are some intangibles that have to be weighed -- specifically the preferences of Disney, Kennedy, Spielberg and even Ford (in my analysis, I'm not factoring Koepp's preferences).

Starting with Disney, I think Disney is mindful of the locations of the other current movies on their slate so as to minimize concentration risk and possible audience fatigue. So while Disney's Jungle Book didn't stop Marvel from setting some key scenes in Africa [Avengers 2 and Civil War (and 'yes', I know Lagos was actually Atlanta)], I think having a presumably Africa-centric film already on the docket (Black Panther slated for a 2/18 release) could deter Disney from going Africa-heavy again so soon. On the other hand, I know the Obama Adminstration spent time encouraging US consumer product and other companies to invest in Africa, and while I don't buy into the Obama-to-be-the-next-head-of-Disney rumors, I wouldn't be surprised if Disney had received entreaties to do more in (mainly Central) Africa. I do like the Professor's Ghana storyline -- the Ghanaians are some of my favorite people on the planet (Niger and Congo are too dicey -- though a very cool 1960's story could be set in the Congo).

China
So Disney wants to sell tickets -- which takes us to China (and appeasing the Chinese government, so the film can actually be shown there).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoo
. . . .I’d love to see Hong Kong in the 5th film; Indy against the Commies with some British involvement...

I doubt we will see Hong Kong. China does not like anything that reminds people of the colonial past. I remember there was a restuarant in Shanghai that got in trouble for either naming itself 'The French Concession' or saying it was in 'The French Concession.' That's a total no go. Trust me, we won't see any 1960 vintage Art Weber's in Hong Kong sporting Her Majesty's livery. In the same vein, I bet we don't see the Philippines and/or Vietnam (unless it puts Vietnam in a bad light). Plus, keeping with my prior Disney logic, there is a live action Mulan planned for 11/18.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoo
...as well as some SNOW somewhere/anywhere!

I'm pretty much with the crowd on this one. Further to my observations above, Kennedy and Marshal are mountain folks (Telluride), so I wouldn't be surprised with snow -- though I don't think it will be in Finland because folks there are so damn touchy about everything. They invent IKEA and think they know everything (just kidding on the IKEA thing). I think Frozen is sufficiently in the backround, so that's not a consideration -- but something tells me Scandanavia won't cut it.

I realize I have ruled out more than in. Simply put, I like:

U.K./London/Edinburgh/Ireland
West/East Germany
Greece/Crete/Malta
Canadian Rockies/Alaska
Japan
Cuba & Panama Canal
Galapogos/Fiji/Easter Island

I think we get a Venice equivalent. In other words, an on-location shot that will, to use the Professor's phrase, "broaden" the audience's world. I look at Wes Anderson's success in Grand Budaphest and wonder if they find another Eastern European setting that would really transport people.

Last edited by Joe Brody : 02-04-2017 at 12:48 AM.
Joe Brody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2017, 08:31 AM   #54
Finn
Moderator
 
Finn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Finland
Posts: 8,880
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Brody
They invent IKEA and think they know everything (just kidding on the IKEA thing).
I'm gonna be touchy about not inventing IKEA. That was Sweden.

And something being based on Finland/Finnish mythology is more or less a pipe dream. I don't think it would be much of a topic to speculate even here if there weren't prominent Finnish members in the attendance, offering commentary.
Finn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2017, 06:12 PM   #55
Joe Brody
IndyFan
 
Joe Brody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Sweetest Place on Earth
Posts: 2,543
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn
I'm gonna be touchy about not inventing IKEA. That was Sweden.

(laughing) Dude, that was the (attempted) joke.
Joe Brody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2017, 10:21 PM   #56
IndyForever
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London, England
Posts: 301
Spielberg cannot film in China as he insulted them over the 2008 Olympics which meant KOTCS was never released there throwing away millions in box office!

Spielberg mainly films nowadays in US or UK anything else is usually handled by 2nd unit so its highly unlikely he will change his stance now. I am still amazed he even agreed to Indy 5 after all this time the odds are stacked against it being even close to KOTCS production quality now Lucas is not bankrolling the movie with an unlimited budget & Disney are well known for slashing budgets even on Star Wars (why Rogue One had to get major reshoots). Its going to be a constant studio battle over budget to even get Indy5 onscreen so that rules out extensive location shooting.

I think Indy 5 will have a lot of soundstage interiors & most of the exteriors will be captured by a small 2nd unit with perhaps Harrison infront of a green screen.

You also need to remember there are few places left in the world which look like 1950s or 1960s era so that means either extensive CG to alter them or choosing locations with wide open landscapes (like the American mid west).
IndyForever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2017, 03:48 AM   #57
Finn
Moderator
 
Finn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Finland
Posts: 8,880
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Brody
(laughing) Dude, that was the (attempted) joke.
And I thought I was being funny by getting touchy about undue praise. (IKEA is, after all, quite a success story.) Usually people don't get offended by it, perhaps politely correct you at best.

We Finns, on the other hand... hmm. Okay, that was pretty meta, I admit. I was parodying an actual reaction, not the stereotype.


So, let's just try an actual joke instead.

Q: I look good in a magazine. But when you get me home, you notice I have screws loose and/or missing. You get on me, and my legs spread apart immediately. What am I?

A:
A Swedish blonde... or an IKEA armchair.
Finn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2017, 07:38 AM   #58
Udvarnoky
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,350
Maybe slashing Indy's budget would be a good thing. Even adjusting for inflation, the first three films were way less expensive than Crystal Skull, but they were motivated to squeeze those dollars. The movies look better and are better as a result.

For what it's worth, Lucas claimed Crystal Skull would have saved money by shooting internationally, but Spielberg was willing to pay the premium to shoot entirely in the states.
Udvarnoky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2017, 02:27 PM   #59
Joe Brody
IndyFan
 
Joe Brody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Sweetest Place on Earth
Posts: 2,543
Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyForever
Spielberg mainly films nowadays in US or UK anything else is usually handled by 2nd unit so its highly unlikely he will change his stance now. I am still amazed he even agreed to Indy 5 after all this time the odds are stacked against it being even close to KOTCS production quality now Lucas is not bankrolling the movie with an unlimited budget & Disney are well known for slashing budgets even on Star Wars (why Rogue One had to get major reshoots). Its going to be a constant studio battle over budget to even get Indy5 onscreen so that rules out extensive location shooting.

I think Indy 5 will have a lot of soundstage interiors & most of the exteriors will be captured by a small 2nd unit with perhaps Harrison infront of a green screen.

You also need to remember there are few places left in the world which look like 1950s or 1960s era so that means either extensive CG to alter them or choosing locations with wide open landscapes (like the American mid west).


I can live with same level of production quality as we saw in Civil War -- and assume the same standard will production quality will apply for Indy V. That said, whoever did the Civil War location scouting and set design for the scenes shot in Atlanta did an exceptional job -- I think they got at least the Lagos and London scenes filmed there.

I will stand by my guess that there will be at least one on-location 'Venice' equivalent -- even if it is just London or Germany.

Speaking of Germany, I'll respond to your claim that there are few places that still look like the 1950's or 1960's. Check out the former East Berlin -- without even trying I could find settings for not just the '50's & '60's but every decade from the last century.

Also, Cuba and Panama would be very easy as well -- though I don't see them spending the bank to actually shoot in one of those locales.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn
What am I?

I'm awful at this -- I guessed 'corkscrew' knowing that's not right. Say what you will about Swedish blondes, they know how to play soccer/football.
Joe Brody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2017, 11:42 PM   #60
Kai Hagen
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn
I'm not actually complaining about the idea of the Russkies strutting around Scandinavia like they own it. After all, we never had any issues about Nazis roaming around Egypt when it was still a British protectorate. Yet one reason it worked was because they didn't even attempt to handwave or excuse it - they just were there and that was it.
The movie got away with that because it was released before the Information Age. And there were less history books available than there are now. And at that time, chances were that an average American wouldn't hear the opinion of someone from Egypt or the UK about that scene. I don't think a new movie would get away with those kinds of wrong historical depictions now. Look at how the Britons reacted to U-571 on the internet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyForever
Spielberg cannot film in China as he insulted them over the 2008 Olympics which meant KOTCS was never released there throwing away millions in box office!
If the diplomatic relationship continues to get more and more dicey, I think there's a possibility that none of the Hollywood films would be shown in the Chinese cinemas while Trump is president.

Last edited by Kai Hagen : 02-08-2017 at 11:59 PM.
Kai Hagen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2017, 10:29 AM   #61
Stoo
IndyFan
 
Stoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Neuchâtel, Switzerland (Canadian from Montreal)
Posts: 7,933
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kai Hagen
The movie got away with that because it was released before the Information Age. And there were less history books available than there are now. And at that time, chances were that an average American wouldn't hear the opinion of someone from Egypt or the UK about that scene. I don't think a new movie would get away with those kinds of wrong historical depictions now. Look at how the Britons reacted to U-571 on the internet.
The "Information Age" has nothing to do with it. My friend's older brother (a WW2 buff) pointed out the error in "Raiders" back when the movie came out and he was only 16! None of us cared about the mistake and neither did anyone else I told.

Things like that are still being done today. Ex. Look at the "Pirates of the Caribbean" movies, which have the British East India company in a part of the globe they never went to. It's doubtful that this inaccuracy is common knowledge nor a big concern for fans of the series.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyForever
Spielberg cannot film in China as he insulted them over the 2008 Olympics which meant KOTCS was never released there throwing away millions in box office!
They don't need to film in actual China when they can use somewhere else that resembles it (just as was done with the previous entries).
Stoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2017, 08:49 PM   #62
Kai Hagen
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoo
The "Information Age" has nothing to do with it. My friend's older brother (a WW2 buff) pointed out the error in "Raiders" back when the movie came out and he was only 16! None of us cared about the mistake and neither did anyone else I told.

Things like that are still being done today. Ex. Look at the "Pirates of the Caribbean" movies, which have the British East India company in a part of the globe they never went to. It's doubtful that this inaccuracy is common knowledge nor a big concern for fans of the series.
Oh yes it does. Already, your post is here to inform those who don't know. This didn't happen before the Information Age. There's clearly a difference.
Kai Hagen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2017, 11:21 AM   #63
Stoo
IndyFan
 
Stoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Neuchâtel, Switzerland (Canadian from Montreal)
Posts: 7,933
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kai Hagen
Oh yes it does. Already, your post is here to inform those who don't know. This didn't happen before the Information Age. There's clearly a difference.
The difference being that it’s on a computer screen 10 years after those movies came out? I was told about the “Raiders” error an hour after seeing it opening weekend. That inaccuracy was also mentioned shortly afterwards in a magazine (“Starlog”?) or perhaps even on “Sneak Previews” with Siskel & Ebert, if I remember correctly. No need to “hear the opinion of someone from Egypt or the UK” on the internet to find out the facts in 1981.

The Information Age hasn’t deterred historical inaccuracy in films. Since Indy 5 concerns both Spielberg & Disney, keep in mind that “Pirates”, “Lone Ranger” and “War Horse” have fudged history and each of them were made during the Information Age so, yes, a new Indy movie could do it, too (and it SHOULD…because that’s the series’ pattern).

Imagine someone at Disney/Lucasfilm objecting:
“No, no, no! We can’t put Chinese troops in Australia because everyone knows everything these days and Average Joe won’t accept it! Think about the internet backlash!”

The negative reaction to “U-571” is justified (but a whole other ball game). Bad comparison.
Stoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2017, 08:15 AM   #64
Walecs
IndyFan
 
Walecs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 104
Are we seriously critizing a movie where Nazis are killed by ghosts coming out from the Ark of Covenant because it lacked historical accuracy?
Walecs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2017, 08:22 PM   #65
Finn
Moderator
 
Finn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Finland
Posts: 8,880
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walecs
Are we seriously critizing a movie where Nazis are killed by ghosts coming out from the Ark of Covenant because it lacked historical accuracy?
While I find the critique a bit silly as well, I still have to say that suspension of disbelief is actually not a uniform thing. It's not broken when a story veers from real life. It's broken when a story veers from its own internal logic and established rules.

In the world of Indiana Jones, it is firmly established that supernatural (or at least forces that could be perceived as supernatural) exists. Therefore no one bats an eye when supernatural elements appear.

However, it has NOT been established that the world of Indiana Jones takes place on a timeline that is alternate from our own. History is still largely following its course as we know it. Therefore somebody might take notice of the historical inaccuracies.

So one shouldn't suggest that because of the supernatural elements we should ignore the historical inaccuracies. It's very much a logical fallacy.

But that's not to say people complaining about the historical inaccuracies are in the right. Because it has not been established that the world of Indiana Jones aligns with our own timeline down to minute detail. The broad strokes are there, but the inaccuracies are so rife (and sometimes deliberate) that because of said fact, one should still be able to uphold the suspension.
Finn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2017, 04:04 AM   #66
Walecs
IndyFan
 
Walecs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn
While I find the critique a bit silly as well, I still have to say that suspension of disbelief is actually not a uniform thing. It's not broken when a story veers from real life. It's broken when a story veers from its own internal logic and established rules.

In the world of Indiana Jones, it is firmly established that supernatural (or at least forces that could be perceived as supernatural) exists. Therefore no one bats an eye when supernatural elements appear.

However, it has NOT been established that the world of Indiana Jones takes place on a timeline that is alternate from our own. History is still largely following its course as we know it. Therefore somebody might take notice of the historical inaccuracies.

So one shouldn't suggest that because of the supernatural elements we should ignore the historical inaccuracies. It's very much a logical fallacy.

But that's not to say people complaining about the historical inaccuracies are in the right. Because it has not been established that the world of Indiana Jones aligns with our own timeline down to minute detail. The broad strokes are there, but the inaccuracies are so rife (and sometimes deliberate) that because of said fact, one should still be able to uphold the suspension.

I actually agree with this.
Walecs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2017, 10:00 AM   #67
dr.jones1986
IndyFan
 
dr.jones1986's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 366
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoo
The difference being that it’s on a computer screen 10 years after those movies came out? I was told about the “Raiders” error an hour after seeing it opening weekend. That inaccuracy was also mentioned shortly afterwards in a magazine (“Starlog”?) or perhaps even on “Sneak Previews” with Siskel & Ebert, if I remember correctly. No need to “hear the opinion of someone from Egypt or the UK” on the internet to find out the facts in 1981.

The Information Age hasn’t deterred historical inaccuracy in films. Since Indy 5 concerns both Spielberg & Disney, keep in mind that “Pirates”, “Lone Ranger” and “War Horse” have fudged history and each of them were made during the Information Age so, yes, a new Indy movie could do it, too (and it SHOULD…because that’s the series’ pattern).

Imagine someone at Disney/Lucasfilm objecting:
“No, no, no! We can’t put Chinese troops in Australia because everyone knows everything these days and Average Joe won’t accept it! Think about the internet backlash!”

The negative reaction to “U-571” is justified (but a whole other ball game). Bad comparison.

I think the real problem with China is not even so much filming there because as you say they can film it somewhere else. The problem is that using China as a setting would mean that it would only make sense to have the communist Chinese and Mao (offscreen most likely) as villains. In China they still consider Mao 70% right and would likely boycott anything critical of their nations history. Despite the fact an Indiana Jones movie set in the 60's or 70's would make sense to use China during the Cultural Revolution as a backdrop, I cannot see it happening from a business prospective. China is not only the most populous nation on earth but it is an increasingly important source of film revue for Hollywood studio's who are trying to appeal to the emerging Chinese middle class. Anything critical of the Chinese communist history would likely be barred from release in the PRC.
dr.jones1986 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2017, 11:11 AM   #68
Stoo
IndyFan
 
Stoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Neuchâtel, Switzerland (Canadian from Montreal)
Posts: 7,933
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walecs
Are we seriously critizing a movie where Nazis are killed by ghosts coming out from the Ark of Covenant because it lacked historical accuracy?
Hi, Walecs. None of us were criticizing the film for its inaccuracy (as I said in my other post, I don't care about it), we're just discussing the issue with regards to #5's possibility of shoehorning an enemy force into a time & place where it never was. It doesn't bother me because these are 'fantasy' movies, after all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dr.jones1986
I think the real problem with China is not even so much filming there because as you say they can film it somewhere else. The problem is that using China as a setting would mean that it would only make sense to have the communist Chinese and Mao (offscreen most likely) as villains.
They could avoid using the Chinese government as villains (in the same vein as "Doom"). There's a fitting scenario but I'll save it for one of the 'villain' threads.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dr.jones1986
In China they still consider Mao 70% right and would likely boycott anything critical of their nations history. Despite the fact an Indiana Jones movie set in the 60's or 70's would make sense to use China during the Cultural Revolution as a backdrop, I cannot see it happening from a business prospective. China is not only the most populous nation on earth but it is an increasingly important source of film revue for Hollywood studio's who are trying to appeal to the emerging Chinese middle class. Anything critical of the Chinese communist history would likely be barred from release in the PRC.
Joe Brody mentioned the same thing earlier and it's a sad fact. Hollywood's pandering to the Chinese market is on the rise, however, it isn't solely confined to communist history. It's become offensive to show ANY Chinese bad guys in movies these days. (Hello, James Bond.)

I don't expect China to appear but it's my desire; Indy in The Orient and to see some snow. With a Chinese location, both could be had at the same time and done without having its people as antagonists. Scratching the 'Indy vs. Commies' angle, a part could be set in a remote area with only the terrain/weather or a booby-trapped temple creating the situations. It could be a way of setting some scenes there without any objections. ("NO! This is still an insult to Chinese territory!")

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Brody
That's a total no go. Trust me, we won't see any 1960 vintage Art Weber's in Hong Kong sporting Her Majesty's livery.
Thanks for shooting down my hopes of a scene involving one of Cpt. Blumburtt's family relatives!
Stoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2017, 02:44 PM   #69
dr.jones1986
IndyFan
 
dr.jones1986's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 366
Of course it is an insult, how dare you even question Chinese control of Xinjiang or Tibet! Seriously, I think a remote setting in Western China somewhere, perhaps Tibet or somewhere along the old silk road would be a great Indian Jones location. It is unfortunate that the communists won't be used as the antagonists because of this. Based on the fact that Skull took place in 57, this movie would likely be set at least a decade later, in the late 60's during the height of the cultural revolution. The communists during the cultural revolution would make the perfect villains for an Indiana Jones movie. The Red Guards destroyed countless historical sites and relics because they felt they didn't conform to Mao's communist ideals. This would be very much keeping in line with the Nazis being used as anti-intellectual villains in the original films. Having Indy in China during the Mao era without communists would be tough to do because of the lack of westerners being allowed into that country at that time and having him sneak into China might also bother the Chinese censor boards.

Even using the Soviets again might create some tension. There were some Russians who were annoyed about this last time and the relationship between the US and Russia has deteriorated since then.
dr.jones1986 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2017, 06:56 PM   #70
Joe Brody
IndyFan
 
Joe Brody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Sweetest Place on Earth
Posts: 2,543
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoo
Thanks for shooting down my hopes of a scene involving one of Cpt. Blumburtt's family relatives!

[In my best Walter Sobchak] "I did not know that."
Joe Brody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2017, 10:24 PM   #71
Kai Hagen
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by dr.jones1986
I think the real problem with China is not even so much filming there because as you say they can film it somewhere else. The problem is that using China as a setting would mean that it would only make sense to have the communist Chinese and Mao (offscreen most likely) as villains. In China they still consider Mao 70% right and would likely boycott anything critical of their nations history. Despite the fact an Indiana Jones movie set in the 60's or 70's would make sense to use China during the Cultural Revolution as a backdrop, I cannot see it happening from a business prospective. China is not only the most populous nation on earth but it is an increasingly important source of film revue for Hollywood studio's who are trying to appeal to the emerging Chinese middle class. Anything critical of the Chinese communist history would likely be barred from release in the PRC.
What if the movie jumped to the time of President Nixon in the 1970s? This was when he warmed up to China. The current face of Harrison Ford would certainly make Indy look right for that era.

Previously, I thought that the declining relationship between the US and China would take the Chinese market off the equation. Now I don't know. Trump changes his mind very often, and it seems like he is already changing his mind about China, but that could change again in the future.

If the movie goes back to before WWII, I'd like to see the German expedition to Tibet. The official objective could be a ruse to hide their real objective. It's an artifact that's so dangerous that Indy needs to prevent it from getting into the hands of the wrong people.

Last edited by Kai Hagen : 02-17-2017 at 10:54 PM.
Kai Hagen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2017, 02:48 PM   #72
Raiders112390
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,694
Red China would make fine enemies in the 1960s. I believe the movie will avoid the late 1960s though.
Raiders112390 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2017, 11:29 PM   #73
Kai Hagen
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raiders112390
Red China would make fine enemies in the 1960s. I believe the movie will avoid the late 1960s though.
I'd feel too sorry for them. They were starving due to the bad policies by their government. It would be good if Indy helps out the starving Chinese civilians.
Kai Hagen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2017, 11:23 AM   #74
seasider
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyForever
Spielberg cannot film in China as he insulted them over the 2008 Olympics which meant KOTCS was never released there throwing away millions in box office!

Insult is a strong word and a little unfair in my opinion. He was initially involved with collaborating with Zhang Yimou in planning the opening and closing ceremonies of those Olympics but unfortunately had to give in to political pressure from liberal groups in the U.S who were critical of China's role in Darfur. And that was almost 10 years ago and as recently as 2013 he has expressed a desire to make a movie in China. Personally, I have a hard time seeing even China holding onto an old grudge against one of Hollywood's most recognized filmmakers but what do I know?

Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyForever
Spielberg mainly films nowadays in US or UK anything else is usually handled by 2nd unit so its highly unlikely he will change his stance now. I am still amazed he even agreed to Indy 5 after all this time the odds are stacked against it being even close to KOTCS production quality now Lucas is not bankrolling the movie with an unlimited budget & Disney are well known for slashing budgets even on Star Wars (why Rogue One had to get major reshoots). Its going to be a constant studio battle over budget to even get Indy5 onscreen so that rules out extensive location shooting.

Since 2008, Spielberg has done location shooting in parts of the UK and Europe and Canada and of course the U.S. While I don't see him returning to Tunisia or Sri Lanka anytime soon, I disagree that he's going to be against going on location himself but it will depend on what is being filmed. But just because he's reluctant to shoot in exotic locales doesn't mean he's going to resort to doing everything with soundstages, studio backlots and bluescreens. When he did Munich he was able to use Malta as a backdrop for Israel for example and Hawaii was used to double for Peru for KOTCS. I mean you're talking about a director who up until recently was still editing his movies using a moviola.

As far as budget, Lucas bankrolling the movies may have given Spielberg a lot of creative freedom but it was never a blank check situation. Lucas even admitted that he wanted to shoot outside of the U.S for KOTCS to save money but Spielberg preferred being close to home at the time. And Spielberg deals with studios all the time with movies and budgets unlike Lucas who prefers independence so I don't see how Disney would give him a really hard time unless the movie was approaching James Cameron budget levels.
seasider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2017, 05:26 PM   #75
Kai Hagen
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 106
I'd like to see Indy go back to India as one of the locations. This time, I want to see impressive traditional architecture and authentic cuisine. And I'd like to see some Bollywood celebrities. To be honest, The Temple of Doom gave me a wrong impression on India when I was a kid. This was before the internet and there was a lack of info about India where I lived in. I want to see an Indy movie that would give more justice to Indian culture this time.
Kai Hagen is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:55 AM.