Disney eyeing Chris Pratt

Finn said:

I wonder how useful it is replying to someone with the attention span of a goldfish, given the inability to read and comprehend the last 15-20 posts in the thread, which pretty much answer this question.

Click to expand...

Not very useful, I would argue.

I was going to reply along the same lines, then decided not to waste my time.

But I truly admire you for your persistence, Sir Finn, I really do.

If you watch Pratt's interview with Kimmel, Pratt gives him a look when he brings up Indiana Jones. He wasn't supposed to, and Pratt has an awful poker face. There's a done deal somewhere.

As my username indicates, I'm sold on Ford as Indy. But it's not just Harrison- I'm also sold on Spielberg and John Williams, who will probably play no role in this if it's rebooted. Someone will re-work Williams' themes and Spielberg will exec produce at best. It'll be Indiana Jones in name only. I like the package deal. I'd prefer it that they leave the series as is, but we know that won't happen, so...

If they can find a guy who encompasses the qualities of Indiana Jones, by all means cast him. Much as I like Pratt as Star Lord and in everything else he's done, he's not that guy. Pratt, like most every other actor today, is soft. Ford had a roughness that made you think he'd actually lived through some things. Pratt is just another actor on a conveyor belt of soft, inoffensive man-kids. He's Stifler from the "American Pie" movies with a more sensitive streak.

If it was up to me, I'd put Pratt in an "Uncharted" movie and wait another ten years to reboot Indy, all the while looking for an actor better suited to take on the role.

If only to point out the multitude of possibilities here, I feel somewhat compelled to offer alternate character interpretation. Maybe Mr. Pratt doesn't have any more inkling about the role than we do, but given how the rumor mill's spinning so fast now that it's pretty much out of his control - he could deny it with a straight face a million times and it wouldn't stop people from asking him about it - maybe he simply figures, why not have some fun with it? As in, use the skills he has and act like a guy who has it but is doing his darnest to keep it under wrap.

It's awfully meta, but eh... I could even see myself doing the same in a similar situation, then having a hearty laugh at it under my breath. It could sure create some priceless reactions when they eventually announce the recast and it isn't him. (Or, to humor the fundies, Ford's return.)

This I'd bulltong didn't Clint Eastwood do the same thing in his latter days...in the Unforgiven.? Your underestimating how capable old Ford is. Look at him in Star Wars 7.?????

Túrin Turambar said:

This I'd bulltong didn't Clint Eastwood do the same thing in his latter days...in the Unforgiven.? Your underestimating how capable old Ford is. Look at him in Star Wars 7.

Click to expand...

Unforgiven is a pretty bad example, since it's a standalone film and specifically built around the idea of an aged (anti)hero just trying to put it all past him. Besides, it's hardly an actioner in the first place, but more of a character piece, as most westerns are.

Am I to understand that rather than another happy-go-lucky action romp, you want Indy 5 to be a dark and gritty story, where an aging adventurer tries to stay relevant in a world rapidly moving past him? That's pretty much the theme in the later-day Eastwood pieces. Thinking from a fan's POV, that could be an interesting film, sure, but good luck selling that idea to Disney. It's pretty safe to assume that they didn't acquire the rights to the character for nothing else than more of what already works.

And let's see what kind of role Han plays in Ep VII before we present that as any kind of evidence. Cracking wise in the Falcon's cockpit is still pretty far from cracking a whip while running from the rolling boulder.

Finn said:

Unforgiven is a pretty bad example, since it's a standalone film and specifically built around the idea of an aged (anti)hero just trying to put it all past him. Besides, it's hardly an actioner in the first place, but more of a character piece, as most westerns are.

Am I to understand that rather than another happy-go-lucky action romp, you want Indy 5 to be a dark and gritty story, where an aging adventurer tries to stay relevant in a world rapidly moving past him? That's pretty much the theme in the later-day Eastwood pieces. Thinking from a fan's POV, that could be an interesting film, sure, but good luck selling that idea to Disney. It's pretty safe to assume that they didn't acquire the rights to the character for nothing else than more of what already works.

And let's see what kind of role Han plays in Ep VII before we present that as any kind of evidence. Cracking wise in the Falcon's cockpit is still pretty far from cracking a whip while running from the rolling boulder.

Click to expand...

To be fair, some people were incredulous that Ford was coming back in Indy 4. But I think it's gotten to the point where you enjoy trolling the people who really really want to see him come back and are opposed to a recast.

There is no doubt that Pratt is milking it for all it's worth, the Indy rumor is even in his wiki page... but to be fair, who wouldn't, in his position?

While that does not mean he will actually get the part, the persistence of the rumor is intriguing... it's been talked about for nearly six months now!

We shall see...

After seeing Jurassic World, I don't think it's a stretch to see Pratt as Indiana.

He's not necessarily acting like Jones in the film, mind you, but he's in a middle ground between Star Lord and Jones. The performance has got the basic foundation of what Indy needs and well, "Owen Grady" to "Indiana Jones" shouldn't come as a big leap to anybody who sees the film.

Just seen Jurassic world and if that's pratts best effort for playing a serious straight
Character then I'd rather them get Larry David or one of the Marx brothers to play the next indy.

It was very forced and just bad acting, I like Pratt but the fact is he's not half the actor Harrison is. Harry is a underrated great actor. Pratts a good looking kid who got lucky a clown compared to Harry.

Could you see Pratt play regarding Henry or Harry in the mosquito coast character??

No the fact is he's got the looks but not the acting skills, Harry always had that .

Túrin Turambar said:

It was very forced and just bad acting

Click to expand...

I don't know, I would use those same words to describe parts of Harrison's performance in Crystal Skull. I still cringe every time I watch that first dialog exchange with Spalko. The "wubba-yews" line is just garbage, and made all the worse by cheesy delivery.

On another note, I think expecting the new actor to try and mimic Harrison's take on Indy is going to automatically set you up for disappointment. Any new actor worth his salt is going to give the character his own unique spin. I'd be interested in seeing Pratt's take, even if it was a bit more sarcastic/comedic.

Túrin Turambar said:

Just seen Jurassic world and if that's pratts best effort for playing a serious straight
Character then I'd rather them get Larry David or one of the Marx brothers to play the next indy.

It was very forced and just bad acting, I like Pratt but the fact is he's not half the actor Harrison is. Harry is a underrated great actor. Pratts a good looking kid who got lucky a clown compared to Harry.

Could you see Pratt play regarding Henry or Harry in the mosquito coast character??

No the fact is he's got the looks but not the acting skills, Harry always had that .

Click to expand...

Look, we all love Ford. We all love Ford as Indy. I personally would LOVE to see Ford play Indy again. But I've accepted that it's not going to happen again, and you need to, too.

Did Sean Patrick Flanery play Indy the way Harrison did? No. And it was just fine. NO actor WANTS to ape another's performance, even if it's in a signature role. It isn't rewarding, and it draws unfavorable comparisons.

So for Pratt to win you over, he'd have to transmogrify into a clone of Harrison? Or will you only accept a clone of Ford in the role? Because that's what it sounds like. It's funny how you talk about Harrison's range as an actor while completely denying that Pratt has any. Can he copy Ford as Indy perfectly? We won't know until we see him try. But would he try? Probably not. He would want to bring his own sensibilities to the role, while retaining the core traits of the character.

You can act like Indiana Jones without acting like Harrison Ford. There's more to the character than that. Far more. And it does the character a disservice to deny that. By the sound of your arguments, you must not like anything from the franchise BUT the four films. If that's so, that's fine. But don't pretend to be open-minded to new actors in the role and then have so stringent a requirements list that nobody can live up to your idea.

The character in Jurassic World, Owen Grady, is not Indiana Jones. He's more sarcastic and flippant. But it's more like Indy than any other role Pratt has thus portrayed. In a lot of ways, it's similar to Han Solo. Another role played by -gasp!- Harrison Ford!

Anybody with a brain should be able to look at Owen Grady and see how Pratt can evolve that performance into Jones. And to say that Ford as Indy had no arrogant moments or wit/sarcasm is deluding themselves to avoid giving Pratt credit. There's many moments when Jones is snarky. Not in the vein of Star Lord, but absolutely in the vein of Owen Grady.

I didn't used to see what the Ford detractors saw, but now I'm coming around. The inflexibility around here is staggering. And before I'm accused of "hating" Ford or any such nonsense, note that I'm one of the staunchest lovers of KOTCS, and recall my posts from months ago where I firmly believed that Ford would star in Indy 5. Only when the recasting buzz took over did I realize that it was absolutely going to go that way. I woke up and finally saw the writing on-the-wall.

I think, had LucasFilm still been in the grasp of George, he would have just made 5 with Harry. But Disney has no interest in going against prevalent Hollywood trends. Why would they? They've no loyalty to Ford. They don't have to have it. And general audiences don't either.

Wake up, folks. The 'dream' is over.

FordFan said:

To be fair, some people were incredulous that Ford was coming back in Indy 4. But I think it's gotten to the point where you enjoy trolling the people who really really want to see him come back and are opposed to a recast.

Click to expand...

Now now. Didn't mommy tell you it's a bad idea to accuse someone who can ban you on a whim of trolling?

Okay, THAT was




In any case, there are two differences between me and the Ford fundies. The first one is that unlike them, I don't see recast as a bad idea, be it Pratt or someone else. If the man has other qualities required for the role and it comes down to "playing the type", no one can say he's gonna be bad in it before they see him be bad in it. Anything else is just childish prejudice.

The second difference is a bit more complicated. I don't actually think an aged Harry donning the fedora again - even if it could lead to an Indiana Jones film where very little resembles the earlier films - is a bad idea. The difference is that I think those of us who would be just fine with such a film are in the minority. The fundies seem to say Ford's face alone could haul Disney tons of moolah if they just took that chance. I say that while they'd have some guaranteed income from the most of us, it wouldn't be a success in the general sense. Or who knows, maybe it would. But there's still just far too many unknowns involved for a company like Disney, when they can simply recast and take the character back to what it was over the original trilogy.

So there. I don't oppose the idea or the principle behind it. What I do oppose however is the straight fanaticism and narrow-mindedness some employ while defending said idea. They throw juvenile temper tantrums against the acting chops of anyone who isn't Ford, and practically attempt to force their personal perspective on the entire world, insisting that there are cogs in motion to make such a film and that the world will love it once it's made.

Part of the reason for opposing it is because that kind of pettiness just irks me. Another part is because it's my job to do so. Such a behavior has lead to people getting banned in the past. People I've been genuinely sad to see go, because they've been decent, entertaining characters despite their flaws.

Given how this is not a subject that'd fall under staunchly religious fanaticism (though it can resemble that at times), I'd rather snap my fingers a thousand times in front of a person's face than make a single click over the button that sends them away for good. However... if I finally conclude that that is the lesser evil after all, I'll do so in a heartbeat, knowing I've got the rest of the upkeep's back on the matter.

Yeah, I'm not opposed to a new actor playing the part. I just think it's a tall order to replace Ford and I'll wait until someone worthy comes along. They have to be able to play the rogue, the intellectual, the adventurer, the smartass, and play up the vulnerability. Everyone fires on 3/5 cylinders, and that's just not enough.

I just saw "Jurassic World", and if anyone here is anticipating Pratt as Jones, we have different ideas of what the Jones series needs. I'm telling you- the guy is great at playing a modern day brotagonist, but he'd make a weak Indy.

FordFan said:

Yeah, I'm not opposed to a new actor playing the part. I just think it's a tall order to replace Ford and I'll wait until someone worthy comes along. They have to be able to play the rogue, the intellectual, the adventurer, the smartass, and play up the vulnerability. Everyone fires on 3/5 cylinders, and that's just not enough.

I just saw "Jurassic World", and if anyone here is anticipating Pratt as Jones, we have different ideas of what the Jones series needs. I'm telling you- the guy is great at playing a modern day brotagonist, but he'd make a weak Indy.

Click to expand...

Precisely my thoughts well said.

Also why are certain people being victimised for expressing there own opinions? This is a friendly community forum no? Not a Nazi concentration camp.

FordFan said:

I just saw "Jurassic World", and if anyone here is anticipating Pratt as Jones, we have different ideas of what the Jones series needs. I'm telling you- the guy is great at playing a modern day brotagonist, but he'd make a weak Indy.

Click to expand...

If you present that as your personal opinion rather than an universal fact, nobody's going to give you flak for that.

Should someone, you can trust the upkeep to set them straight.

https://m.youtube.com/?gl=GB&hl=en-GB#/watch?v=VdvgE-SmQuw this is the only man that's capable of the Indy character much more talented then the goofball Pratt. .....Forget Pratt!!!!

Also Harry's just let him play his younger self in a film...........so maybe Harrison want's This kid as the next man with the hat..?

My argument is that Harrison Ford is probably the greatest movie star around today

As a lot of great attributes that make him a great actor. Chris Pratt is not even in the same league as him in the acting ring. I realized that when I saw the kid in Jurassic world last night.

It's going to take a very special gifted talented actor, they must realize he's not good enough?. Harry says Han Solo is a cardboard cut out compared to the multiple layered Character Indiana Jones is. Intellectual,Adventurer,comedian,bad-ass,Archaeologist,Fighter,...it's a tall order.

Come to think of it, I wonder how Raiders would have turned out when they were envisioning more than 35 years ago, had they held up their leading man to some Shakespearean scrutiny. Yet, in the end, they gave the part to a guy whose biggest role to date was this dashing space rogue Han Solo (a character lot akin to Star-Lord) and the rest of his CV consisted of bit parts and playing goofballs like Bob Falfa and Tommy the Cowboy in the Frisco Kid.

Thank heavens they took a shot with this guy and allowed him to show his range.



I don't particularly care about Pratt myself and won't shed a single tear if I see the part go to someone else, but it's still a little unfair to bash a guy based on something he has NOT done yet.

Finn said:

If you present that as your personal opinion rather than an universal fact, nobody's going to give you flak for that.

Should someone, you can trust the upkeep to set them straight.

Click to expand...

There are like, five people on here as is. Do we really need to crack the whip on the remaining few for just being stubborn? I don't think anyone means disrespect.

One upside to Jurassic World being financially successful is Pratt will never wear the Fedora now (thankfully). Universal have him locked into multiple sequels so he will not be chosen as having the same actor associated with 3 franchises will be confusing to the audience

I think you Pratt apologists should crowd fund your own indie amateur production Indy movie if you want him that much as its the closest you will ever get to having your wet movie dream realised now

IndyForever said:

I think you Pratt apologists should crowd fund your own indie amateur production Indy movie if you want him that much as its the closest you will ever get to having your wet movie dream realised now

Click to expand...

Pratt's got more chance at the role now than Ford.

Reverse your statement with Ford's name and you're on the right track.

Now, I'm not specifically pulling for Pratt, I don't think anyone is. But he's as fair a choice as most. And they could easily pick worse.