TheRaider.net
 

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

View Poll Results: Why do you resist Indy 5?
Ford is too old 4 21.05%
Don't trust Lucas 8 42.11%
The story ended rather nicely 3 15.79%
The 1980s were awesome 1 5.26%
The 1930s were awesome 2 10.53%
Rooting for an infallible competing franchise 1 5.26%
Voters: 19. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-19-2012, 03:09 PM   #1
Moedred
Administrator
 
Moedred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: California
Posts: 4,855
Why do you resist Indy 5?

Linking to Indy 5 news on the main site, I've encountered more resistant comments than perhaps anyone. Beyond the visceral response is sometimes an item on the above list. Dig a little deeper between the lines, and you might find a response like "Ford at 70 makes me reflect on my own mortality and frail grandfather." Okay, commenters usually don't leave themselves open to ridicule and run with the herd.

Caveat lector: "the 1930's were awesome" does not refer to the Great Depression, Dust Bowl, Third Reich, Kristallnacht, Poland, Nanking, Soviet collective farming, the Hindenburg, or lack of internet.
Moedred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2012, 03:17 PM   #2
Montana Smith
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 10,616
All of the first five options, as long as "The story ended rather nicely" refers to TLC.

Is there an option to cast five votes?
Montana Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2012, 03:48 PM   #3
Dr. Gonzo
IndyFan
 
Dr. Gonzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,854
Yeah Monty is on it.
If I had to pick just one though... and it is a difficult one of all the options that should be lumped in there, I think that the parties involved are now plainly too old... even if word came today that they had a script (don't hold your breath) I don't see it working.
If they were younger I would CONSIDER watching them have another crack at it. But not only does Harrison's age concern me, Spielberg and Lucas' sensibilities aren't the same anymore.
Even if it was the nineties I'd be a little concerned what would be brought to the table... although Spielberg did make Jurassic Park in '93.
So in my book if one option had to edge out the others, even if barely, it's the age issue.
Dr. Gonzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2012, 03:49 PM   #4
michael
IndyFan
 
michael's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: "What was it again? The penitent man will what? Oh No."
Posts: 1,132
I voted for "The Story Ended Rather Nicely"

although, Ford is Too Old, would've been my next pick.

Look, say what you want about everything between of the beginning and end of KOTCS, but that ending, when he grabs the hat from Mutt is the best in the series.

It should make any die hard Indy fan go F*** Yeah!

Thus, in my book, the series was wrapped up nicely on the big screen.

And honestly, this whole idea of riding into the sunset as end of all endings for Indy, it's easily the fourth best ending.
michael is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2012, 04:50 PM   #5
Indy's brother
IndyFan
 
Indy's brother's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: In the Map Room playing with a laser pointer
Posts: 3,029
Interesting poll. There should be another option in the poll like: Because it's a trendy response, and I want to sound cool on the interwebs.
Indy's brother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2012, 07:17 PM   #6
Mickiana
IndyFan
 
Mickiana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,187
Don't trust Lucas, but I also don't trust Spielberg at this point, not after what they showcased in #4. Of course I would like them to reverse my distrust. I don't totally resist an Indy5, but now I am very wary. If an Indy5 comes out I will enter the cinema with great trepidation, with heightened senses for any traps...
Mickiana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2012, 08:01 PM   #7
Udvarnoky
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,475
This question is better posed to the Beards.
Udvarnoky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2012, 11:54 PM   #8
Montana Smith
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 10,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Udvarnoky
This question is better posed to the Beards.

They're too old and untrustworthy. They were "awesome" in the 1980s when inspired by the 1930s. Their Indy story ended rather nicely in 1989.

Their Indy epitaph was an ignoble undertaking.

Ignoble is apt terminology, since Lucas in particular is notorious for dishonouring his own creations. He creates and recreates for himself with little acknowledgement of the legacy of his original stories. If supping with the devil requires a long spoon, then following Lucas' universes requires acceptance that nothing is ever stable.

Everything is liable to change, depending on his mood. So, cutting Indy's universe off in 1989/1938 suits me better. Nothing else need exist but in a fevered dream.

Therefore I resist the potential nightmare that would be Indy 5.
Montana Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2012, 12:14 AM   #9
Finn
Moderator
 
Finn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Finland
Posts: 8,950
I think clowns are pretty squicky.
Finn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2012, 01:32 AM   #10
Le Saboteur
IndyFan
 
Le Saboteur's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Sham Shui Po
Posts: 1,970
I lack faith in the trio of Lucas, Spielberg, & Ford to do anything with Indiana Jones that isn't strictly by the numbers. They've grown fat and comfortable with financial success, and are seemingly unwilling to do anything that compromises that.

Nor do I trust a certain segment of the fanbase to accept anything that isn't adventure by the numbers. They want Atlantis or the Spear of Longinus, Nazi pummeling, and Dear ol' Dad cracking jokes while flying to far-flung, exotic locales that are completely unrelated.
Le Saboteur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2012, 02:06 AM   #11
Montana Smith
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 10,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Le Saboteur
I lack faith in the trio of Lucas, Spielberg, & Ford to do anything with Indiana Jones that isn't strictly by the numbers. They've grown fat and comfortable with financial success, and are seemingly unwilling to do anything that compromises that.

Nor do I trust a certain segment of the fanbase to accept anything that isn't adventure by the numbers. They want Atlantis or the Spear of Longinus, Nazi pummeling, and Dear ol' Dad cracking jokes while flying to far-flung, exotic locales that are completely unrelated.

To be completely purist about the whole thing, would be to argue that there was only one Indiana Jones film.

And it didn't have 'Indiana Jones' in the title. It was also the only one without a clichéd ending.

While cliché and cheese were elements that made ROTLA possible, subsequent entries play more and more with tongue-in-cheek pastiche. That is, self-parody, which reaches dizzying heights in #4.

What could possibly draw the beards away from continuing down this route?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn
I think clowns are pretty squicky.

Indeed.



What a bunch of jokers.
Montana Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2012, 02:30 AM   #12
Olliana
IndyFan
 
Olliana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 250
I don't resist Indy 5, so I don't vote. But if I would have to vote, I'd go for the Lucas problem. Not because I think KotCS had a bad story, or the Star Wars prequels. But no matter how I look at it, I find it hard to imagine a satisfying Indy 5 with the inevitable presence of Mutt and Marion in mind. The problem lies in the way Indy 4 left us.

Seriously, I don't mind a 70 year-old Ford, and after Tintin, I do trust Spielberg again.
Olliana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2012, 03:30 AM   #13
Mickiana
IndyFan
 
Mickiana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,187
Imagine if they returned to their old form. Down and dirty, rough and tumble, leave the family at home and really go for it. They couldn't lose, could they? They'd probably make more money than ever and please the whole viewing world at the same time. A this stage of their careers, why would they restrain themselves? I'm missing something here, could someone please explain it for me?
Mickiana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2012, 06:30 AM   #14
Kernunnos
IndyFan
 
Kernunnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Chesham, UK
Posts: 275
I don't trust Lucas 100%, but if Indy V as announced today, I doubt I'd resist it.

70 year old Indy? Fine by me.

George's likely ideas? I'd have to wait and see.
Kernunnos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2012, 07:45 AM   #15
Ska
IndyFan
 
Ska's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,438
I don't resist it either, but I voted for "Don't trust Lucas" because it was the closest option to Indy 4 being the reason I resist Indy 5.
Ska is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2012, 11:03 AM   #16
InexorableTash
IndyFan
 
InexorableTash's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 720
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mickiana
Imagine if they returned to their old form. Down and dirty, rough and tumble, leave the family at home and really go for it. They couldn't lose, could they? They'd probably make more money than ever and please the whole viewing world at the same time. A this stage of their careers, why would they restrain themselves? I'm missing something here, could someone please explain it for me?

IMHO, restraint is a *good* thing. When a director has nigh-infinite time, unlimited budget, unfettered creativity, and has editors too scared to make critical decisions, you end up with drek. (*cough* SW prequels *cough*). I like my directors (and writers, etc) to be struggling, forced to work within tight budgets and fighting against the studio/publishers, and deadlines. It forces unexpected sparks of creativity and lets more people involved in the production have a creative say.

EDIT: You'd never get the Cairo Swordsman scene if Raiders had been filmed in a studio and catered by Craft Services.

While I'd dearly love the Big Three to make a grand finale Indy film - mostly to make up for KotCS (and I am still giving it an even chance of happening) I don't think they are capable of recapturing the magic. It's going to take a new, untrusted director and raw young actors to pull off anything resembling the power and originality of the first film(s), and when that's done it won't feel at all like something the Big Three would have done. You can never go home again, sadly.
InexorableTash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2012, 09:53 PM   #17
Violet
Moderator Emeritus
 
Violet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: The Host City of the 2018 Commonwealth Games, Australia
Posts: 3,196
One word- re-boot.

By re-boot, I mean anything along the lines of a new Indy or even a new format such as animation or tele-movies. I know that other fans may be against these ideas, however I don't see how Indyfandom can survive just based on three (or in some people's minds, four) films without the possibility of further adventures in any potential format. I just believe the core concept of Indy is too good for so few adventures.

As others have stated, as shallow as it may sound- age plays here a big part- and it's not only age but the canon itself. In some ways, it needs to be more like Silver Age comics where continuity isn't necessarily important and changes from one Indy to another. Think of them as different parallel universe Indy's.
Violet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2012, 10:16 PM   #18
Montana Smith
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 10,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Violet
By re-boot, I mean anything along the lines of a new Indy or even a new format such as animation or tele-movies. I know that other fans may be against these ideas, however I don't see how Indyfandom can survive just based on three (or in some people's minds, four) films without the possibility of further adventures in any potential format. I just believe the core concept of Indy is too good for so few adventures.

Animation gets my vote. High quality, immersive, with strong characters and storylines, and not just an excuse for a Saturday morning punch up ending weekly with a lame chuckle.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Violet
As others have stated, as shallow as it may sound- age plays here a big part- and it's not only age but the canon itself. In some ways, it needs to be more like Silver Age comics where continuity isn't necessarily important and changes from one Indy to another. Think of them as different parallel universe Indy's.

Comic books are updated to keep them contemporary and their heroes and villains forever young. Without reboots Batman would be 97 at the moment.

Indy however has stuck to continuity, and maintained his 1899 birth year. It was a brave move bringing him back 19 years after TLC with 19 years having passed in his own life. The obvious problem is, of course, the age of the actor most associated with the role.

Animation is the best way to circumvent this issue, so long as Harrison allows his image and an approximation of his voice to be used.

I'd imagine Lucas will still hold a controlling hand over storylines, as he does with Clone Wars. Though cartoons have teams of writers to cajole and advise...

Last edited by Montana Smith : 07-20-2012 at 10:22 PM.
Montana Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2012, 02:03 AM   #19
Mickiana
IndyFan
 
Mickiana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,187
Quote:
Originally Posted by InexorableTash
IMHO, restraint is a *good* thing. When a director has nigh-infinite time, unlimited budget, unfettered creativity, and has editors too scared to make critical decisions, you end up with drek. (*cough* SW prequels *cough*). I like my directors (and writers, etc) to be struggling, forced to work within tight budgets and fighting against the studio/publishers, and deadlines. It forces unexpected sparks of creativity and lets more people involved in the production have a creative say.

EDIT: You'd never get the Cairo Swordsman scene if Raiders had been filmed in a studio and catered by Craft Services.

While I'd dearly love the Big Three to make a grand finale Indy film - mostly to make up for KotCS (and I am still giving it an even chance of happening) I don't think they are capable of recapturing the magic. It's going to take a new, untrusted director and raw young actors to pull off anything resembling the power and originality of the first film(s), and when that's done it won't feel at all like something the Big Three would have done. You can never go home again, sadly.

I agree with you. I wasn't meaning throw huge amounts of money at it and misuse creative talents. Quite the opposite. I was thinking of Raiders and the effort they went to to make it. I suppose I am being nostalgic instead of 'realistic' because they have changed and the industry has somewhat changed since 1980. I just want to see that same spirit back that created Raiders, though I know it won't happen, which reflects what you say: "You can never go home again, sadly."
Mickiana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2012, 12:35 PM   #20
Udvarnoky
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,475
Quote:
Originally Posted by InexorableTash
You'd never get the Cairo Swordsman scene if Raiders had been filmed in a studio and catered by Craft Services.

Points don't come more salient.
Udvarnoky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2012, 09:15 AM   #21
mikieson
IndyFan
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 115
Didnt vote..I want a new Indy..I want a good closure..I love KOTCS and will love anything INDY..
mikieson 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 02:12 PM.