A radically different idea for Indy Five.

Attila the Professor

Moderator
Staff member
Toht's Arm said:
I think this is a really interesting idea, but surely it's one crying out for a legit digital download system? I know the studios continue to be reluctant to keep up with technology, but this kind of episodic filmmaking would be perfectly suited for video on demand?

Wouldn't you still want to see it in the cinema, however?

I figure part of the point is that it is, in its own way, a variation on the old serial format that inspired the series.

It also wouldn't help the apparent seriousness of the project if it could be viewed at home. As much as the serial element, it is a method that hearkens back to the event releases of yesteryear, but with a chapter format standing in place of the old manner of releasing films at only a few theaters that had the technological capacity.
 

Toht's Arm

Active member
Attila the Professor said:
Wouldn't you still want to see it in the cinema, however?

I figure part of the point is that it is, in its own way, a variation on the old serial format that inspired the series.

Yes, I would enjoy seeing it in the cinema, but home theaters are getting so damn good that there's less and less reason to do that these days. At home at least I know there won't be any problems with the picture or sound, as opposed to the cinema where they'll have assigned one projectionist to a dozen screens.

It would be interesting to see if the novelty of episodic storytelling appearing in cinemas once more would be enough to entice people.
 

Montana Smith

Active member
The problem would be getting people to commit to four sittings, as the pre-sold tickets would have to be for specific days and times for logistical purposes. If interest waned the fourth episode presentations might play to an empty theatre for various excuses for non-attendance.

The original format created tales that compelled the viewer to come to the cinema next week, because they would want to know how their hero or heroine was going to extract themselves from a predicament.

If Lucas and Spielberg could mimic that, then that would be the mark of success.
 

Attila the Professor

Moderator
Staff member
Toht's Arm said:
Yes, I would enjoy seeing it in the cinema, but home theaters are getting so damn good that there's less and less reason to do that these days.

It's the experience of it, though. Believe me, I do the majority of my film viewing at home, like anyone, but I don't see how video on demand would be a part of the concept being put forth here.

Toht's Arm said:
It would be interesting to see if the novelty of episodic storytelling appearing in cinemas once more would be enough to entice people.

It certainly would. I'd imagine the hook that would be put forth would be the cliffhanger aspect of it, despite the large asymmetry between what's being proposed here and the actual length of the old serials.
 
Rubbish idea. Nobody goes to the cinema anymore, let alone for a 1 hour film.

Evryone would just download it all off the net like a tv series anyway, so might as well make a 2 hour film instead.
 

Mickiana

Well-known member
I think it would be a brave and rewarding move. The promotions, though, would have to seriously nullify any feelings of being gimmicky, which I think could easily be done. And the movies still have to be good re omit the mistakes of CS.
 

Attila the Professor

Moderator
Staff member
Mickiana said:
The promotions, though, would have to seriously nullify any feelings of being gimmicky, which I think could easily be done.

Would they? I don't see any way around it being seen as a gimmick; more to the point, I'm not sure what you can even call it other than a gimmick. Isn't that the whole idea, to produce an asset for what many would view as an unnecessary film with an unconventional approach?
 

gabbagabbahey

New member
Attila the Professor said:
Would they? I don't see any way around it being seen as a gimmick; more to the point, I'm not sure what you can even call it other than a gimmick. Isn't that the whole idea, to produce an asset for what many would view as an unnecessary film with an unconventional approach?


It's called promotion. Showmanship. Marketing. A spectacle, something that has been missing in movies recently. Bring back the magic. It's not a gimmick if the film making is great. And no other series lends inself to this type of format than Indiana Jones. I still believe in it even if some here can't see past the standard 2 hour release.

The risks are high but so are the rewards, which is the case with everything great.
 

Attila the Professor

Moderator
Staff member
gabbagabbahey said:
It's called promotion. Showmanship. Marketing. A spectacle, something that has been missing in movies recently. Bring back the magic. It's not a gimmick if the film making is great. And no other series lends inself to this type of format than Indiana Jones. I still believe in it even if some here can't see past the standard 2 hour release.

The risks are high but so are the rewards, which is the case with everything great.

I don't think the fact that there are other words with better connotations disbars the idea from being a gimmick. The whole of what I'm saying is that the idea would need to fully own the gimmick so as to justify itself - which likely wouldn't be easy.

Could you explain what you mean when you say spectacle has been missing in movies? Because apart from, say, the sort of big budget, big cast, widescreen event movies that both you and I have alluded to in this thread - It's a Mad, Mad, Mad World, 55 Days at Peking, etc. - I don't see spectacle as being dead at all. Rather, it seems the primary element in most film marketing and filmmaking today.
 

gabbagabbahey

New member
Attila the Professor said:
I don't think the fact that there are other words with better connotations disbars the idea from being a gimmick. The whole of what I'm saying is that the idea would need to fully own the gimmick so as to justify itself - which likely wouldn't be easy.

Could you explain what you mean when you say spectacle has been missing in movies? Because apart from, say, the sort of big budget, big cast, widescreen event movies that both you and I have alluded to in this thread - It's a Mad, Mad, Mad World, 55 Days at Peking, etc. - I don't see spectacle as being dead at all. Rather, it seems the primary element in most film marketing and filmmaking today.


What you see as gimmick I see as brave marketing. And no matter what anyone else has ever done, no one has ever done this. A 4 hour serial type movie spread out over 4 (or 8) weeks.

I mean, let's not get too high on the horse here. We're talking about a series that at it's core is based on trashy, campy, low budget pulp serials. The whole premise was lurid entertainment and cheap gimmick.

I stand behind the idea.
 

Montana Smith

Active member
gabbagabbahey said:
I mean, let's not get too high on the horse here. We're talking about a series that at it's core is based on trashy, campy, low budget pulp serials. The whole premise was lurid entertainment and cheap gimmick.

It would be a marketing gimmick, replicating something long lost from the present cinema experience:

Gary Johnson said:
At their best, these cliffhangers were of such destructive power that the audience was left stunned. How could the hero survive? To find out what happened, we only had to return next week to the same theater. And that was the main purpose of the serial--to keep the theater seats filled with paying customers.

To accomplish this aim, serials frequently stretched the truth (much like movie posters frequently promise much more than their movies deliver) and sometimes they plain lied...
 

Attila the Professor

Moderator
Staff member
gabbagabbahey said:
What you see as gimmick I see as brave marketing. And no matter what anyone else has ever done, no one has ever done this. A 4 hour serial type movie spread out over 4 (or 8) weeks.

I mean, let's not get too high on the horse here. We're talking about a series that at it's core is based on trashy, campy, low budget pulp serials. The whole premise was lurid entertainment and cheap gimmick.

I stand behind the idea.

I'm friendly towards the idea, so I don't see why you're getting so keyed up about this, especially after I've expressly clarified that I did not intend "gimmick" pejoratively.

With that said, I do still think that the idea would require some further justification than simply that that's the way this sort of material used to be presented, be it a more episodic structure or something else.
 

Mickiana

Well-known member
Points on both sides. It is a gimmick, but you wouldn't say it when promoting it, just because of the connotation of the word. Just as I don't hear the word 'spectacle', although 'spectacular' is OK. What about 'gimtacular' or 'gimtastic'? They might work!:p
 

gabbagabbahey

New member
Attila the Professor said:
I'm friendly towards the idea, so I don't see why you're getting so keyed up about this, especially after I've expressly clarified that I did not intend "gimmick" pejoratively.


Fair enough, sorry I misread your thoughts. Cheers.
 

Kernunnos

New member
I think it's a great idea, but it takes Lucas years to mull over each McGuffin. How is he going to cope with having to find four?
 

Pale Horse

Moderator
Staff member
Stoo said:
2) Your 4-chapter Indy 5 idea is less than brilliant because it would be finished within one, brief month.

I agree. There is no forethought on how movies make money for the studios from distribution, theater owner profits, DVD sales, streaming etc.

Not thought out at all.
 

gabbagabbahey

New member
Pale Horse said:
I agree. There is no forethought on how movies make money for the studios from distribution, theater owner profits, DVD sales, streaming etc.

Not thought out at all.


Sigh. You're the one not thinking it through. Yes, the four movies are released in a one month (or 6 week) period. But not everyone is going to run out that first week & see the first installment. Some aren't going to get around to it for 3 or 4 weeks down the road. You simply keep them in some sort of rotation so those who didn't see the pictures in the original week of their release can catch up. Then of course, after all four have been out for a bit the theaters can have showings where you see all four at once one right after another.

Someone has just got to have a big enough pair to try this. Again, I can't think of any other franchise that could pull this off, Indy was born to be a serial.
 

gabbagabbahey

New member
Kernunnos said:
I think it's a great idea, but it takes Lucas years to mull over each McGuffin. How is he going to cope with having to find four?


Now this is true & might be the biggest stumbling block. : ) My advise to him? Keep it simple, fun. Go back & watch several dozen hours of the pulp serial classics to get the rthymn and pacing down.
 

Pale Horse

Moderator
Staff member
gabbagabbahey said:
Sigh. You're the one not thinking it through...

Oh?

A theater doesn't make money on showing a film until week 5 of a release. That is why concessions are priced so high. What good business sense does it make for a theater to showcase a film that will net them a loss?

Don't know what I'm talking about. Check out the marketing debacle 'Tower Heist' endured concerning the streaming rights and distribution ideas they had...not just a month ago.

Pretty ballsy to suggest someone's not thinking something through. Your idea has merit...in that it's gimmicky. But that is not how business works. It won't bring in any money. Money. Money. Money.

Sorry if reality hurts. It doesn't mean you're a bad person.
 

gabbagabbahey

New member
Pale Horse said:
Oh?

A theater doesn't make money on showing a film until week 5 of a release. That is why concessions are priced so high. What good business sense does it make for a theater to showcase a film that will net them a loss?

Don't know what I'm talking about. Check out the marketing debacle 'Tower Heist' endured concerning the streaming rights and distribution ideas they had...not just a month ago.

Pretty ballsy to suggest someone's not thinking something through. Your idea has merit...in that it's gimmicky. But that is not how business works. It won't bring in any money. Money. Money. Money.

Sorry if reality hurts. It doesn't mean you're a bad person.


And who says the first film is pulled before 5 weeks are up?

Secondly, it's a package deal. If they're in for one they're in for all. While most pictures come & go rather quickly this one really would have the potential to be on the screens much longer than the average film.
And just so we're on the same page, could you please reference the last time an Indiana Jones movie lost money for anyone?

And again, gimmicky. It's basically the definition of a pulp serial.

Yes, I agree. It's breaking new territory. Details would need to be worked out, and yes, you are right, that is not my area of specialty. But if someone was bold enough and had a big enough vision this concept could be monster, no question in my mind.
 
Last edited:
Top