kongisking said:
I disagree that time travel is a strictly sci-fi concept. Lots of stories utilize a supernatural means of travel. It just is so well-known for being in science fiction. That doesn't rule out a more imaginative, paranormal way to do it. And besides, you feel time travel is impossible? Well...not to be a smartass, but these movies are packed to the gills with bull****. Why should magic boxes that melt faces, healing rocks, cups that make you young, and psychic skulls be allowed, but not another famous speculative genre convention?
A supernatural object, by its nature, is beyond the laws of science as understood by man. So I wouldn't have a problem with time travel, or some kind of fractured reality situation, since this could be in keeping with the fantasy elements that Indy has become familiar with.
kongisking said:
I personally think the Indy series has a lot more potential than folks give it credit for. So many fans think it absolutely has to stick to certain rigid requirements to work, and I see the appeal of "if it aint broke don't fix it", but you then run the risk of losing the balls to experiment. KOTCS was a weird mixture of wanting-to-try-something-new AND not-messing-with-formula. So it resulted in a disjointed movie that couldn't really commit to either one.
People had problems with aliens in KOTCS. My only problem with them is that they weren't the kind that fitted with the 1950s theme, but too obviously pertaining to the later popular concept of 'ancient aliens'.
If Indy was set in the modern day then the aliens of KOTCS would have been more relevant and part of popular consciousness.
However, the creatures
were described as 'Interdimensional' beings, implying that they derived from a supernatural plane rather than another planet. This is a precedent on the big screen for all manner of strange creatures from myth and legend.
kongisking said:
I think if people were more willing to let Indiana Jones try new, more off-the-wall ideas, the series would benefit from it. I don't agree that Indy has less potential for endless stories like Star Wars. You just have to dare to experiment. Star Wars does it all the time, but for some reason Indy's not allowed? Ludicrous.
You wouldn't want Indy to go full Jar Jar Binks would you?
There are paths that Indy could take that work in comic books, but wouldn't go down well on film. Just how far would you take him from his source?
The original question is what would a modern day Indy film be like?
There's no reason there couldn't be a film set in 2014 with a man in a leather jacket and fedora calling himself Indiana Jones. Get him into a remote place and he can be carrying his gun in a holster and encountering strange adventures. Yet, put him back in civilization and he becomes more irrelevant and somewhat anachronistic.
Unless of course he's a modern man. In which case he's no longer the same character, and essentially
not Indiana Jones. Therefore the only reason to call it an 'Indiana Jones' film is so that it will attract a larger audience than a film with 'Jack Hunter' in the title.