Curse of the Cold War

Joe Brody

Well-known member
Put aside for a moment your feelings for Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.

Also put aside Crystal Skull?s highly respectable $317M 2008 global box office.

And even put aside, for a second, your thoughts for Mutt.

We have at least one more go-round with Harrison Ford as the timeless raider and there?s unease among fans. Most would agree that the Indiana Jones franchise is not in equilibrium; that it?s at a crossroads and there?s little runway left to appropriately wind down Harrison Ford?s venerated tenure as the man with-the-fedora and set the stage for the next chapter. This all led me to draft some guiding considerations for whatever?s next and it was these considerations that informed my treatment Indiana Jones and the Curse of the Cold War, that I submitted to the Raider.net contest earlier this year (an expanded version of the treatment is immediately below). Love it or hate ? my synopsis and guiding considerations are meant to start a dialogue. Indy Fans, where you at? And respectfully, I challenge Disney and the great powers-that-be to do better.
 
Last edited:

Joe Brody

Well-known member
Indiana Jones and the Curse of the Cold War (EXPANDED TREATMENT)

In the opening, May Day, 1963, Indiana daringly rescues Mutt from the Cuban prison where Mutt has languished since the Bay of Pigs. There?s a parade with great communist pageantry: Kalashnikov carrying female soldiers, columns of Russian made tractors, tanks, vigorous flag waving ? and crowds ? and music. We first see Indiana, dressed as an aged Soviet General, on the grandstand next to a sharp-eyed Che Guevara ? who is grand marshal (Castro was in Moscow). With the parade flowing past, Che, as an aside, thanks Indy (as the Soviet General) for all his perspective on not just the Russian Revolution (?what an honor to learn from someone who knew Lenin!?) but also Latin America history (?your perspective has helped me plan my next steps outside of Cuba?)(Che was later shot by firing squad in Bolivia). Indiana would be at ease, smiling and waving. Then, Che turns his full attention to Indy and says: ?I?ve verified all your accounts down to the smallest detail ? and they are all true so unquestionably you were in Russia during the Revolution, except there?s one problem: there was no one by your name at any of the places you?ve described.? Indy perks up at this ? he?s been found out. In short order, chaos erupts in a scene reminiscent of ToD?s Club Obi Wan, and Indy escapes to pursue his true objective: freeing Mutt from the prison in a nearby compound. Afterwards, on the boat to the U.S., we learn how Mutt, inspired by his father?s exploits, had become part to the CIA-funded unit that led the failed invasion and that Indiana only undertook his rogue rescue after watching years of failed diplomatic efforts to free his son (and having to bite nails all through the Cuban Missile Crisis). Mutt, embarrassed by being rescued by his father, rejects Indy and announces his intent to return to the military by angrily quoting President Kennedy?s inaugural pledge, saying that he?s prepared to "pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and success of liberty.?

Traveling on alone, Indiana is met abruptly by Agent Bob Smith (FBI from KotCS) at TWA?s new terminal at Idewild Airport. A ready helicopter flies them to the roof of a New York skyscraper where, in the elite Sky Club, Indiana is made a Faustian offer by nameless U.S. government advisors ?X? and ?Y?: steal prominent Egyptian relics from museums in Europe in exchange for assurances that Mutt will be ?kept safe? during his next posting as a military advisor in Vietnam. ?X? tosses a copy of Time Magazine?s March 29, 1963 edition on the table. On it, Egypt?s Abdel Nasser is shown in profile with the profile of the Sphinx behind him. Nasser?s ambitions are clear from the image ? it?s as if the Pharaohs have returned. ?Y? then gives a masterful overview of the Cold War and explains Egypt can?t go over to the Communists. ?Y? explains that Egypt?s President Nasser has already sold out to the Russians for aid to build the Aswan Dam. ?Y? claims that the Egyptians can be bought back by giving them the Nefertiti Bust and the Rosetta Stone ? to help Nasser?s Arab Nationalism campaign. Indiana responds, ?But these relics are with our Allies.? ?Which is exactly why we need someone to procure them,? replies ?Y.? ?X? is silent throughout.

Frustrated, Indiana agrees and travels with Marion to Europe where they meet Sallah. Marion?s motivations are obvious (she has to protect her son) ? but Sallah?s are complex. He wants relics returned to Egypt but he also fears the goings-on at the Aswan site. In Germany, Indy adds a fourth member of the team: Heinrich ? a character referenced in KotCS ? who we learn is actually a young man Indy found as a starving orphan after WWII who has since grown into an academic star. At first, Marion objects to Heinrich putting himself at risk ? but Heinrich insists, saying that the Joneses are the only family he?s got. Sallah then pipes in, ?Speaking of family. . . .? ? and introduces his twenty something daughter, Alia, who has come along to ?keep her father out of trouble.? There is instant chemistry between Alia and Heinrich. Indy shrugs and explains the two objectives: stealing the Nefertiti Bust from Neuschwanstein Castle in Bavaria (which served as a museum since the 1800?s and was used a storehouse for Art during WWII) and the Rosetta Stone from the British Museum in London. Indy then proposes that they split up ? telling the girls and Heinrich to steal the Bust (because security at Castle Neuschwanstein ?is a joke?) while he and Sallah will travel to London to steal the Rosetta Stone (because ?it?s a real museum? and the Stone ?is really heavy?). Marion takes umbrage and says getting the Stone will be ?kid?s play? and she and Alia can get it on their own. With that, Marion starts to leave with Alia. Smiling broadly, Henrich follows, puts his arms around each woman, and says laughingly over his shoulder in German, ?I am leaving with the girls.? (?Ich fahre mit den Mädchen?). Sallah turns to Indy, ?Indy, we lost our German.? Indy scowls slightly and says, ?Come on, we?ll be all right.?

Cutting back and forth between each caper, the team execute daring thefts ? finding that the Stasi and KGB are also attempting to obtain the relics. As Indy and Sallah begin the break-in to the Castle, Indy makes a casual warning about something like a loose window-sill. Amazed, Sallah would ask how Indy knows this. ?Easy,? Indy responds. ?I had to break in here during the War. You know you?re getting old when you have to break into the same castle twice.? Indiana and Sallah then go on to execute a very messy and chaotic theft (due largely to the competing Stasi group) while Marion?s team executes a very clever heist that leaves barely a clue. With the thefts garnering world headlines, the team transports the relics covertly to Cairo. In Cairo, Sallah brokers a meeting with Egyptian leaders at the dam site and takes Indy to meet an old engineer who designed the Dam. Cairo is now a different place -- TV antennas now dominate the rooflines. The old man gives information on the Dam and reveals the Dam?s secret purpose: flooding a tomb to contain a powerful evil.

At the site, the Soviets take the relics and attempt to bury Indy and Co. alive on a set reminiscent of the dam scene at the beginning of Doctor Zhivago. Amidst a supernatural episode, the Dam and relics (actually precise copies made by Marion) are destroyed and Indy and Co. escape ? with Heinrich and Alia making notable contributions.

A post-script takes place before the Defense of Human Freedom mural in the U.S. State Department in Washington D.C. The scene introduces a new character, the Jones? attorney Hollace Flynn, a man in his mid-forties who walks with the assistance of a cane but looks like a fighter. Young bureaucrats scurry by ? all bareheaded ? and several even turn an eye toward Indy, Flynn and Marion ? the only people wearing hats. The Joneses have finished their debriefing and ask Hollace if there?s anything to be done about Mutt. Hollace shrugs. ?Mutt is an adult, he?s volunteered and he?s already in Vietnam. He?s not being held against his will and unfortunately [here Flynn looks over his glasses at Indiana] he has a proven disposition toward risk taking.? Indy looks imploringly at Marion. She soothes him, ?Indy -- he?s your son, and Lord knows it took you awhile before you found your MOJO.? Indy smiles and offers his arm. The three walk out together.

So, the stage then would be set for the sixth and final film. Among the CotCW villains would be a character who would play a major role in the next film. Mutt will be in Vietnam and a group of new (and younger) characters will step to the forefront. CotCW would also contain foreshadowing about the passing of the fedora ? but to who? Remember Indy didn?t get it from his Dad ? he earned it. So who would it be? Mutt? Alia? Heinrich? Someone else? But as a parting thought: Isn?t Henry a derivation of the name Heinrich? So what I would propose for the sixth film would be a rift on the Cain and Abel tale ? between Mutt and Heinrich ? a theme that John Steinbeck explored to great acclaim in East of Eden.
 

Joe Brody

Well-known member
GUIDING CONSIDERATIONS (assuming anyone is still reading)


1. Stay true to the brand. The Indiana Jones franchise is classic adventure. Adventure that cuts across exotic global locations and twentieth century history ? all illuminated with glowing, golden-era ambiance. Best exemplified by the Young Indiana Jones Chronicles the franchise is a catalyst; it makes people want to learn more about history. As the Indiana Jones characters move into the turbulent 1960?s, the franchise should embrace rather than duck the challenges presented by this complicated time. Films like Argo and shows like Mad Men prove that there is an appetite for recent history and the next Indiana Jones films should capitalize on this interest and showcase prominent 1960?s places and events. There are stories to tell about Egypt and the post-Israel Middle East without antagonizing any side and stimulate interest in the region and its recent history. Smartly mixing in more history (and compelling historical figures such as Abdel Nasser and Che Guevara) will only serve to strengthen the franchise?s identity and distinguish it from the competition.

The 1960?s are also relevant to the brand because it?s the modern era. It?s the jet age. And by this time Indiana has spent a lifetime plumbing the depths of the supernatural, and, frankly, having crossed paths with crystal skulled inter-dimensional beings, it?s safe to say that an outer limit has been reached. So where else is there to go? Swing the pendulum in the other direction ? de-emphasize the supernatural and the macguffin. Make an Indiana Jones film that would be the one most grounded in period history. In my synopsis, I build on Crystal Skull with a story about the Cold War, with the action set in Cuba, West Germany and Egypt ? with Vietnam looming in the background (all early Cold War ?battlegrounds?).

2. Make the Brand Relevant and Relatable. The Marvel Universe and the Fast and the Furious are two of today?s gold standard franchises. In the Marvel Universe the more fantastical superhero elements are well blended with a mix of topicality (contemporary issues), character-driven traditional themes, comic relief, and fast paced action. The Fast and Furious franchise is an ethnically diverse, fan driven action franchise that makes great use of foreign locations, music and social media to build the brand and enhance the fan experience. What sets these franchises apart from the (emotionally barren) Transformers and Jason Bournes CGI-enhanced action franchises of the world is that viewers identify and relate (or want to relate) to Toretto family barbecues, Tony Stark putzing around in his man-cave and Thor-as-the-prodigal-son.

Yes, there?s a whole lot of hugging going on at the end of Crystal Skull (and a wedding to boot!) but it all falls short. Nothing in Crystal Skull holds a candle to the magic earlier in the franchise: Indy and Marion making eyes at each other in Cairo on Sallah and Fayah?s terrace or Indy?s breakthrough with Henry Senior on an airship headed out of Berlin. In the next film, the relationships have to matter; there has to be conflict and emotional depth.

And a huge part of getting relevant is getting younger (unless Indiana Jones wants to become the official action franchise of the AARP). Mutt isn?t the answer ? but I am willing to bet he stays in the picture after a strong showing in Fury. In fact, Shia Labeouf, with his recent troubles, is more of a liability (and should be de-emphasized in the next film). So how to get younger? To start, no more Harold Oxley?s or Charles Stanforth?s. Next, introduce at least two new, twenty-something characters in the next film. My synopsis introduces two twenty-somethings: (1) Heinrich ? a character referenced in Crystal Skull ? who we learn is actually a young German of African descent who Indy found as a starving orphan after WWII and has since grown into an academic star, and (2) Alia ? Sallah?s youngest, who is worldly but jaded by global instability and fiercely protective of her old man. These characters form the nucleus of a younger diverse group that will take more prominence in the sixth film where I propose Mutt?s character returns with a more central role.

3. Two Quick Technical Asides:

a. Coach for the Quarterback. Any one who has seen the Harrison Ford (My Wife! My Family!) Compilation on YouTube knows that Ford?s acting range has become the butt of jokes. This is painful for his longtime fans and the truth is ? it?s not his fault. Many of Ford?s directors (likely afraid of being accused of looking for a Han Solo or Indiana Jones recycled character) seem to have kept Ford in a box and limited him to expressions of anger/righteous indignation ? and now this is all YouTube fodder. Going forward, Ford?s Indiana Jones should play to strengths and avoid being an angry old man. All grumpy complaining should be banned. Elderly Indiana should be poised, funny and embracing his elderly status. Gary Trudeau?s Doonesbury routinely makes jokes about how the elderly are invisible in today?s society. The Indiana Jones character should embrace this in the mode of classic trickster and sagely use his age to his advantage. This is especially key in his dealings with Mutt where Indiana must be level-headed and patient ? due to his greater perspective and appreciation of Mutt?s strong emotions which he experienced himself as a young man ? and a desire to not be his father.

b. Minimize the CGI. Nothing to say here except make a film that makes the audience feel that it?s been someplace other than a green screen.

4. Tell a Story. Build the next two films around Indiana?s relationship with Mutt. The three film story arc would unfold with: (#4) Kingdom of the Crystal Skull establishing the father/son relationship, (#5) Indiana and Mutt falling out, and (#6) a final reckoning. This story arc complements Last Crusade?s Henry Senior father/son reconciliation story and gives the two ?trilogies? a kind of symmetry. The early 1960?s ? with John F. Kennedy and the era?s inter-generational conflict ? provides the perfect backdrop for the fifth film and Mutt?s break from Indiana. In the early sixties, Mutt, caught up and inspired by Kennedy?s ambitions and optimism, would cast out for opportunities to live up to his father?s example and make his own name (recall, it was JFK?s hatless inaugural that put a stake in the fedora). But Mutt isn?t Indy, and the challenges of the 1960?s aren?t as ?simple? as the world Indy confronted as a young man. The Bay of Pigs is perfect for Mutt?s first misstep. Vietnam, the second.

With these observations setting a larger context, here is my proposal for the next film. Set in 1963, Indiana Jones and the Curse of the Cold War (?CotCW?) tells the story of how the designs of one country to control another are as futile as a parent?s efforts to control their children. CotCW is a classic three part adventure that could be shot with the look and feel of a Hitchcock thriller. Notably, CotCW's has clear parallels with The Man Who Knew Too Much in that Indy and his family/friends are pawns in a larger game.
 

Stoo

Well-known member
Joe Brody said:
Love it or hate ? my synopsis and guiding considerations are meant to start a dialogue. Indy Fans, where you at?
Firstly, congratulations on winning the contest. Secondly, when first reading the shorter synopsis I was wondering if it was you who wrote it!

Thirdly, you're continuing the aspect of Indy being cheated/betrayed by his fellow countrymen. While this element is in 3 of the 4 films (only "Doom" is spared of it), I feel that it would be a little tired & predictable for the 5th. It also makes me wonder if Indy would still trust the government to uphold their promise.

Fourthly, in my opinion, your story is too U.S.-centric* (with all the references to the Bay of Pigs, Vietnam, Kennedy, etc.). As a whole, the Indy movies & TV show are not about American history. If so much emphasis is to be placed on what was going on in The States in the early '60s, then it would've been better (in my opinion) to leave out England & Egypt and set the tale entirely within the U.S.A., Cuba and Berlin.

*Please don't take this as an insult because I have many relatives, friends & colleagues who are Yanks (and I'm using that term affectionately).:)
Joe Brody said:
Films like Argo and shows like Mad Men prove that there is an appetite for recent history...
With all due respect, "Argo" is pseudo-history.(n)

Also, 1963 can't really be considered as 'recent history' today because it was 51 years ago. You & I are almost the same age so compare the 45-year spread between 1936 to the release of "Raiders" in 1981. Back then, it sure didn't feel like recent history to me nor my peers. (Plus, my teenaged nephews & nieces think that anything before 1990 is "really old".:eek:)
Joe Brody said:
1. Stay true to the brand. The Indiana Jones franchise is classic adventure. Adventure that cuts across exotic global locations and twentieth century history ? all illuminated with glowing, golden-era ambiance. Best exemplified by the Young Indiana Jones Chronicles the franchise is a catalyst; it makes people want to learn more about history. As the Indiana Jones characters move into the turbulent 1960?s, the franchise should embrace rather than duck the challenges presented by this complicated time. Films like Argo and shows like Mad Men prove that there is an appetite for recent history and the next Indiana Jones films should capitalize on this interest and showcase prominent 1960?s places and events. There are stories to tell about Egypt and the post-Israel Middle East without antagonizing any side and stimulate interest in the region and its recent history. Smartly mixing in more history (and compelling historical figures such as Abdel Nasser and Che Guevara) will only serve to strengthen the franchise?s identity and distinguish it from the competition.

2. Make the Brand Relevant and Relatable. The Marvel Universe and the Fast and the Furious are two of today?s gold standard franchises. In the Marvel Universe the more fantastical superhero elements are well blended with a mix of topicality (contemporary issues), character-driven traditional themes, comic relief, and fast paced action. The Fast and Furious franchise is an ethnically diverse, fan driven action franchise that makes great use of foreign locations, music and social media to build the brand and enhance the fan experience. What sets these franchises apart from the (emotionally barren) Transformers and Jason Bournes CGI-enhanced action franchises of the world is that viewers identify and relate (or want to relate) to Toretto family barbecues, Tony Stark putzing around in his man-cave and Thor-as-the-prodigal-son.

Yes, there?s a whole lot of hugging going on at the end of Crystal Skull (and a wedding to boot!) but it all falls short. Nothing in Crystal Skull holds a candle to the magic earlier in the franchise: Indy and Marion making eyes at each other in Cairo on Sallah and Fayah?s terrace or Indy?s breakthrough with Henry Senior on an airship headed out of Berlin. In the next film, the relationships have to matter; there has to be conflict and emotional depth.

And a huge part of getting relevant is getting younger (unless Indiana Jones wants to become the official action franchise of the AARP).
A bit of overkill with that terribly misused word, don't you think?;)
 

Le Saboteur

Active member
Stoo said:
Firstly, congratulations on winning the contest. Secondly, when first reading the shorter synopsis I was wondering if it was you who wrote it!

Wait. This is what *won* the Indy V contest? I didn't pay attention to it for various reasons, but if this is what won, then it's not surprising that the series is doomed. The desperation in keeping Ford's tired arse around aside, Mr. Brody has managed to shrink the formula even further. It's almost as if there's only one narrow slice of the world that's worth exploring.
 

AndyLGR

Active member
I think putting aside feelings for KOTCS is difficult, there is a lot to learn from that film and by that I mean there are mistakes that they shouldn't make in a potential Indy 5.

One of the first things that jumped out at me is the comparison between the Fast and Furious films and the Marvel movies, although they are very successful, IMO they don't hold a candle to the first 3 Indy movies. To me they are your typical vacous blockbusters in many respects.

To me I don't see why Indy movies can stay in the style that they have always been, its the story thats the key and thats what let KOTCS down sadly.

My ideal scenario for a new Indy movie would be something that has just one companion along for the journey, not the over the top numbers that followed him in KOTCS. Leave all the family baggage back home, (no sons or wifes along for the adventure - thats too cliched in many Hollywood sequels) and get back to basics - just Indy after an artifact in a film that spans more continents and is more expansive in its scope than the last one was. They can have the Russians along if they want them to replace the Nazis if they like.

However if the next Indy movie is not going to feature Harrison Ford then I think they should take him back to the 1930s with the new actor.
 

Forbidden Eye

Well-known member
Le Saboteur said:
Wait. This is what *won* the Indy V contest? I didn't pay attention to it for various reasons, but if this is what won, then it's not surprising that the series is doomed. The desperation in keeping Ford's tired arse around aside, Mr. Brody has managed to shrink the formula even further. It's almost as if there's only one narrow slice of the world that's worth exploring.

I really hate to play this card, I really do, but...seeing how often you mock Indiana Jones fans for being...Indiana Jones fans, on an Indiana Jones forum I really have to wonder why you bother coming here.

I will say, I like Joe Brody's idea of expanding the Cold War into the Indyverse. I know because of Last Crusade several people out there believe Indiana Jones has to be set in a 1930s WWII and that "he needs to fight Nazis", but I really like the idea of Indy existing in another era and handling the issues of that time and if done right could be interesting(Kingdom did some of this well but it also left you wanting to expand on it more like exploring Spalko's obsession with mind-control).

While I'm not really crazy about bringing Marion or Mutt back, bringing Sallah back and exploring his character and his life(and giving him offspring) could definitely help at capturing some of the old chemistry back(while still exploring new ideas). My biggest issue on Joe's summary is that he doesn't expand of the "MacGuffins"(which seem to be this bust and Rosetta Stone). I know some have said "The MacGuffin really shouldn't matter" but seeing how each MacGuffin played a huge role in each of the previous movies to the point of even impacting the particular genre of each individual film I think the MacGuffin, and the powers they posses, impact the film greatly.
 

Joe Brody

Well-known member
Sorry for the delay in responding -- I was traveling this past week.

Stoo said:
Also, 1963 can't really be considered as 'recent history' today because it was 51 years ago. You & I are almost the same age so compare the 45-year spread between 1936 to the release of "Raiders" in 1981. Back then, it sure didn't feel like recent history to me nor my peers. (Plus, my teenaged nephews & nieces think that anything before 1990 is "really old".:eek:)
A bit of overkill with that terribly misused word, don't you think?;)

That's a helluva observation -- and I suggest that's worthy of a thread (comparing, for example, how much the world changed between '36 and '80 and '80 and today). Thanks for making me feel like a relic. At least I'm not ashamed of the music from the '80's.

Le Saboteur said:
Wait. This is what *won* the Indy V contest? I didn't pay attention to it for various reasons, but if this is what won, then it's not surprising that the series is doomed. The desperation in keeping Ford's tired arse around aside, Mr. Brody has managed to shrink the formula even further. It's almost as if there's only one narrow slice of the world that's worth exploring.

I came to a realization about the Indy series awhile back. It's not about the fans. It's about the power players at the top (and, as we saw in KotCS, their families). Recognizing that, I played the hand that was dealt me from KotCS -- so there was no "desperation" on my part in keeping Ford. Left own my own, I would come up with another story. I'm not quite following you on how I shrunk the franchise -- I admit, I riff on all the films quite a bit -- but I wouldn't calling it "shrinking the formula" -- if anything I'm following it, much in the same way James Bond flirts with Ms. MoneyPenny each time he goes to get his assignment.

AndyLGR said:
I think putting aside feelings for KOTCS is difficult, there is a lot to learn from that film and by that I mean there are mistakes that they shouldn't make in a potential Indy 5.

One of the first things that jumped out at me is the comparison between the Fast and Furious films and the Marvel movies, although they are very successful, IMO they don't hold a candle to the first 3 Indy movies. To me they are your typical vacous blockbusters in many respects.

Yes but they sell tickets -- and they are better than things like the Transformers.


Forbidden Eye said:
While I'm not really crazy about bringing Marion or Mutt back, bringing Sallah back and exploring his character and his life(and giving him offspring) could definitely help at capturing some of the old chemistry back(while still exploring new ideas). My biggest issue on Joe's summary is that he doesn't expand of the "MacGuffins"(which seem to be this bust and Rosetta Stone). I know some have said "The MacGuffin really shouldn't matter" but seeing how each MacGuffin played a huge role in each of the previous movies to the point of even impacting the particular genre of each individual film I think the MacGuffin, and the powers they posses, impact the film greatly.

I kept the MacGuffins light because I think we hit a ceiling with the aliens. I think going with two real items would be a fresh direction.
 

AndyLGR

Active member
Joe Brody said:
Yes but they sell tickets -- and they are better than things like the Transformers.
True and I know selling tickets is to many people the be all and end all, but I hope that Indy movies in the future (no matter who plays him) stay true to the spirit of the originals rather than sacrifice story and characters.

Joe Brody said:
I kept the MacGuffins light because I think we hit a ceiling with the aliens. I think going with two real items would be a fresh direction.
A wise move, aliens crashed through the ceiling.
 

Pale Horse

Moderator
Staff member
At some point, and I don't think it's here would be finding the consensus of do we want indy to sell tickets or win awards. I think current hollywood thinking aligns itself to those two ends. Raiders was award winning. KotCS was designed to sell tickets.

The above, takes itself more seriously and perhaps could be award winning if done properly.
 

Finn

Moderator
Staff member
Pale Horse said:
Raiders was award winning.
You could argue that largely by accident.

If there's one movie in the series that was meant to be "award winning" by design, it was LC.
 

Joe Brody

Well-known member
On the selling tickets vs. awards debate with respect to Raiders, I will take Lucas and Spielberg at their word. I think Lucas spoke true when he said wanted to make Raiders simply because it was the film that he wanted to watch. And Spielberg said that he needed Raiders to show that he could deliver a film on time and on budget. For both, I think everything that happened after was gravy.


AndyLGR said:
A wise move, aliens crashed through the ceiling.

If anyone has the right qualifications around here to give me grief it's you -- with that Avatar.
 

AndyLGR

Active member
Joe Brody said:
If anyone has the right qualifications around here to give me grief it's you -- with that Avatar.
raiders-of-the-lost-ark-1981--14-630-75.jpg
 

Tibor

Member
Joe Brody said:
Put aside for a moment your feelings for Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.

Also put aside Crystal Skull?s highly respectable $317M 2008 global box office.



Actually, the 2008 global box office for Crystal Skull was $786M; $317M in the US. Another good argument for not making Indy 5 US-centric, since it made more internationally than domestically. :hat:
 

Lance Quazar

Well-known member
Tibor said:
Actually, the 2008 global box office for Crystal Skull was $786M; $317M in the US. Another good argument for not making Indy 5 US-centric, since it made more internationally than domestically. :hat:

Sadly, the Chinese moviegoing public will eat up whatever American piece of garbage comes down the pike.
 

Le Saboteur

Active member
Forbidden Eye said:
I really hate to play this card, I really do, but...seeing how often you mock Indiana Jones fans for being...Indiana Jones fans, on an Indiana Jones forum I really have to wonder why you bother coming here.

Stoo forces me to maintain a presence, but as you and your friends have exhaustively proven (and I enjoy reminding you of this), this is a Harrison Ford fetish site. Indiana Jones is a concept, not single individual. Some times he resembles Ford, sometimes Corey Carrier and River Phoenix. At other times he's looked an awful lot like SPF48. He's also looked like a generic white guy with a hat and a bullwhip. David Esch, Doug Lee, and John Armstrong have all lent their voice talents to that anonymous white guy too.

Stoo said:
Thirdly, you're continuing the aspect of Indy being cheated/betrayed by his fellow countrymen

For a guy who's so distrusted by his government, he certainly does carry a lot of water for 'murica! in the eyes of same fans.
 

Joe Brody

Well-known member
AndyLGR said:

That's what I'm talking about.


Le Saboteur said:
. . . . this is a Harrison Ford fetish site.

Been on this site for a lot of years and I'd only apply the word 'fetish' in two instances:

(1) the gearheads - which seems to me to have really abated in past years, and
(2) the Young Indy Chronicles Table.

And again, I'm only sticking with Ford because I thought that was the deal he struck: he'll do Han Solo on the condition he gets another shot at being Doctor Jones (and maybe I'm wrong on this as well -- in which case, I'm going with Ford on the assumption that he'll be back at least once more).

. . . and I agree with you on the concept part -- but I personally prefer to elect to draw the line at the original soldier-of-fortune, part-time grave-robber concept that sure as heck was not the kid of some college professor. For this gig, I work with the other films.
 
Last edited:

Forbidden Eye

Well-known member
Le Saboteur said:
Stoo forces me to maintain a presence, but as you and your friends have exhaustively proven (and I enjoy reminding you of this), this is a Harrison Ford fetish site. Indiana Jones is a concept, not single individual.

Yeah, because there's nooo thread anywhere that discusses the possibility of Chris Pratt being Indiana Jones. :rolleyes:

You keep throwing that word "fetish" as an insult, even mocking what you seem to see as a possible homoerotic feelings on the site, but there's nothing on this forum that is out of the ordinary. Harrison Ford originated the role, perfected the role, played Indy just 7 years ago and still remains an active player in Hollywood; naturally Ford is someone that would be of interest to us. Is it any sort of a surprise that he'd be a person of much discussion here on a forum dedicated to some of his most iconic work(and to quote Spielberg himself, more integral to success of the movies than anyone else?)? Do you ever give people on others forums are hard time? There are a lot of James Bond fans out there who to this day insist Sean Connery is the best James Bond despite the many changes the franchise has gone through; do you give any of them trouble?

There's nothing preventing you from discussing any of those people you listed or any other person for being cast in a potential reboot. I guess I should've figured its easier for people to complain than be productive.

Joe Brody said:
I kept the MacGuffins light because I think we hit a ceiling with the aliens. I think going with two real items would be a fresh direction.

Fair enough...but do you have in mind any supernatural power that these macguffins possess?

After all, neither of the beards were crazy over the idea of the Holy Grail, feeling it was fairly light following the Sankara Stones, but still explored the theme of staying young forever/having a divine touch in addition to exploring its actual power of eternal youth(even if they only really showed its power at the very end).
 
Top