Montana Smith
Active member
replican't said:I agree, although the last two have been pretty good.
That would be Christopher Eccleston and David Tennant.
I can't bear to acknowledge the latest one!
replican't said:I agree, although the last two have been pretty good.
Montana Smith said:That would be Christopher Eccleston and David Tennant.
I can't bear to acknowledge the latest one!
replican't said:Ha. Yeah, I'll give you Eccleston and Tennant. The new one is the equivalent of giving Shia the whip and hat - concession to the teenage pound/euro/dollar.
Henry W Jones said:There are other characters and can be more created in the same spirit as Indiana Jones. Let Indy be a classic and come up with a new classic character for future generations. Not everything needs to be redone/rebooted.
Montana Smith said:Yes.
To me Indy is really Harrison.
A reboot is tantamount to doing another Indy with Harrison past his prime. Like clinging onto something for dear life, when something else could be done instead.
It only erodes what we already have. (Which is how I feel about KOTCS being one too many Indy movies).
Raiders112390 said:Being fair then, let's let Batman on screen die with Christian Bale
Raiders112390 said:Kind of sad that Indy fans want the series to die and just fade away all because KOTCS soured their feelings on the series as a whole. KOTCS was subpar, so that means ANY future Indiana Jones film, Harrison or not would be? No,it doesn't. Harrison can be replaced, the series can be rebooted, it can be the way it was meant to be in the beginning (IE, Indy as a sort of American James Bond, but as an archaeologist). The Indy series could've spawned a franchise of films as long as the Bond series if Lucas/Spielberg had been up to the task. But in the future, in a reboot, it can be. Ford is not the last actor on Earth who could play a rogueish adventurer.
Montana Smith said:Indy was born with Harrison. To me he has a single adult identity.
Batman was born in a comic book. He has multiple identities. He regenerates for each generation and his story is retold in contemporary settings.
Any Indy movie without Harrison would be subpar. KOTCS without Harrison would have even worse.
It's kind of sad that 'fans' want to milk a single character to death and beyond.
Indy wasn't even a special character. He's an everyman who thrives on extraordinary luck. Those are dime a dozen pulp characters. His stories can be replicated by any such character without having to consider the already overstuffed life of one man and the constraints of his world and chronology.
A fresh character in a new world would provide more opportunity.
Right. Can't the REBOOT TWITS understand this or are they living in a dream world? (Maybe in 20-50 years but not now!)Dr. Gonzo said:There won't be a reboot for at least 20 years. If even at all.
Indeed! Reboot/Schmeeboot. In itself, the term & idea SUCKS!Le Saboteur said:Why a reboot? The term itself is far too...ah, nebulous. If I understand it correctly, you're striking down all Canon Law and otherwise blazing your own trail with well-established characters. So then what exactly needs to be re-booted?
Nothing. While Indiana Jones doesn't exist in a vacuum, each adventure is self-contained. Putting another actor in the role doesn't change a thing about the character; accepting a new actor in the role is going to have to happen if there's any hope of further adventures. Y'know, that whole high cost of living thing...
Nah, I disagree. People who equate the Indy films with the James Bond series conveniently/unknowingly ignore the fact that Indiana Jones was created in film, with Harrison Ford defining the role...unlike Bond, who already existed in novels, BEFORE being portrayed on a screen. (Connery wasn't even the 1st actor to play James Bond!)Raiders112390 said:Harrison can be replaced, the series can be rebooted, it can be the way it was meant to be in the beginning (IE, Indy as a sort of American James Bond, but as an archaeologist).
NO. Absolutely not because the two series aren't the same thing. Bond film stories were drawn from pre-existing novels and directed by many, different people. (Re: Lucas/Spielberg being "up to the task"...Do you even understand what the term "franchise" means?)Raiders112390 said:The Indy series could've spawned a franchise of films as long as the Bond series if Lucas/Spielberg had been up to the task.
EXACTLY! Thanks for reinforcing the point, Smiff! Indy is a different animal.Montana Smith said:Batman was born in a comic book. He has multiple identities. He regenerates for each generation and his story is retold in contemporary settings.
Henry W Jones said:I gotta agree with the Batman/Bond comparison being totally different from Indy. Also its not that KOTCS was below average that makes me not want a reboot, its the whole idea of taking something that is great and trying to bleed all the life out of it until we have a Roger Moore / Bond style Indiana Jones film. I'll pass on that.
replican't said:How about this - Indy 5 as a kickass computer game set back in the 30s, with Harriison providing the voice.
The technology is pretty much there now. With the motion sensor controls, the whip and gun and fists thing could rock.
Who wouldn't want to control a photo-realistic Indy and punch women and ethnic minorites?
replican't said:The technology is pretty much there now. With the motion sensor controls, the whip and gun and fists thing could rock.
Mickiana said:Reboot, relaunch, continuation, whatever you want. I just want more adventures from Indiana Jones, with or without Harrison Ford.
I remember Indys Brother saying something like he could watch Indiana Jones digging up potherds, which is a sentiment I agree with.
This springs from a wish that the 90s and 00s had offerings of more Indiana Jones, a thought that I'm sure Spielberg reflected in a quote, if I remember correctly.
At this stage we will be lucky to get another one out of GL, SS and HF. But 20 -50 years from now? As true as that may be, I don't like it!
Henry W Jones said:Is it still Indy? Problem is without Harrison its a Indiana Jones knock off. That to me is like saying you are too old to be exciting, let's get a younger guy to live as you so your adventures can continue. What if someone decided to write songs in the style of Jimi Hendrix and called himself Jimi Hendrix would that be acceptable? Or would it be a knock off of Hendrix? All great things come to an end and horrible things are often called reboots/remakes. I would rather they don't.
Raiders112390 said:I tend to think that it's funny that the ones who are most against any future Indiana Jones films and are afraid of the idea of a reboot are also Batman fanboys. Makes me wonder what their true motivation is. If one lesser film in a series can damn the whole series or any future of a series for you, perhaps you aren't really a fan of the series to begin with.
Raiders112390 said:If one lesser film in a series can damn the whole series or any future of a series for you, perhaps you aren't really a fan of the series to begin with.
Dr. Gonzo said:Better watch your tongue there boy.
Raiders90210 said:I tend to think that it's funny that the ones who are most against any future Indiana Jones films and are afraid of the idea of a reboot are also Batman fanboys. Makes me wonder what their true motivation is.
Montana Smith said:
What's the difference between an Indy fanboy and Batman fanboy?
Is there some hierarchy of fandom?
If you're categorizing, can you put me in the Terminator fan box please?