General Indy 5 Thread - rumors and possibilities

Honestly...will there be another Indy film in the next decade?


  • Total voters
    148

RedeemedChild

New member
Indy's brother said:
... It could be read into that SS meant genre in the way of "what kind of religion/mystical force", which in turn sounds like yes indeed, they have chosen a macguffin. Of course, no one has been hired to write the thing as of yet...Unless George is writing it himself just to spite the world. Which sounds like him a bit, actually.


That's a fine good assumption. I think that is more than likely the way it is, by genre Spielberg must have be alluding to a religious or supernatural related MacGuffin which might or could be something along the lines of something as big as The Ark of the Covenant or as arcanian as The Staff of Wizards.
 

Toht's Arm

Active member
RedeemedChild said:
That's a fine good assumption. I think that is more than likely the way it is, by genre Spielberg must have be alluding to a religious or supernatural related MacGuffin which might or could be something along the lines of something as big as The Ark of the Covenant or as arcanian as The Staff of Wizards.

I'm almost certain that the use of the word "genre" was in reference to KotCS being a hat-tilt to 50s sci-fi movies, as was suggested further back in this topic. AND I would have thought that the most obvious genres that Indy 5 could borrow from would be Hammer horror (and thus the haunted castle) or the Hitchcockian "innocent man accused" stuff.

Spielberg's subsequent backpedal is probably just a way of mollifying people (who were shocked at the idea of a complete change in tone for the film) without actually giving away what kind of genre influences would likely appear.
 

Henry W Jones

New member
Indy 5 idea

Opening shot: Paramount logo turns to snowy mountain top and Indy, Short Round and there two guides travel through the mountains of Ararat on the eastern border of Turkey looking for Noah's ark. Once they arrive to the location, one of the mountain guides try to kill Short Round and Indy setting off an avalanche in the process. Indy and Shorty barely escape with there lives while the two guards are buried alive. Indy and Shorty decide to return at a later date to uncover their treasure buried in the snow from the avalanche. That gives us a snow scene and the escape from the avalanche would serve as the boulder type action sequence.

Indy returns to his "day job" to be told by the military they need him to go to Egypt to recover the Book of Thoth in the city of the dead before the Russians do. It's supposed to be locked in a gold box locked in a silver box locked in an ivory and ebony box locked in a sycamore box locked in a bronze box locked in an iron box. With all those keys to locate I'm sure there is plenty of plot there. Indy tells the family he's off on another adventure and leaves them to their regular lives and meets up with Sallah in Egypt and the hunt for the keys and the treasure begins..............

I don't know if it's a good idea, but it is an idea none the less.
 

Attila the Professor

Moderator
Staff member
Toht's Arm said:
I'm almost certain that the use of the word "genre" was in reference to KotCS being a hat-tilt to 50s sci-fi movies, as was suggested further back in this topic. AND I would have thought that the most obvious genres that Indy 5 could borrow from would be Hammer horror (and thus the haunted castle) or the Hitchcockian "innocent man accused" stuff.

Spielberg's subsequent backpedal is probably just a way of mollifying people (who were shocked at the idea of a complete change in tone for the film) without actually giving away what kind of genre influences would likely appear.

This is certainly the only interpretation which doesn't hinge upon one of the finest genre filmmakers of our day forgetting what "genre" means while speaking to the press.
 

InexorableTash

Active member
Agreed.

However, it does make me wonder what genre they might be thinking of. Here's what's been rumbling about in my brain for the last year, told in the form of a hypothetical story brainstorming session:

We want to make up for KOTCS. So we'll go back to the strongest sequel in the series. Last Crusade. That was a father/son story - great, since we need this to be an Indy/Mutt story. We can't have them together the whole time so one element we'll borrow is having them split up for the first half of the movie.

We can't make it "Indy looking for Mutt", we need a twist, so let's make it "Mutt looking for Indy!" Mutt's not independent and world-savvy - he's more of a bumbler - but we can play on that. This will give him a chance to grow as he's trying to track down and rescue Indy. Of course, Indy doesn't need rescuing like his dad did, so it won't be exactly the same as LC.

We need to have exotic locales - KOTCS stuck too close to home. And we can't have too many characters on the adventure like KOTCS. We should have Sallah since the audience loves him and it worked in LC. Maybe Mutt can track down Sallah for help finding Indy?

Also, this is going to be Indy's last outing, so we better have a hand-off story for Mutt. But really, we can't hand over the hat and the whip - it's the 1960s. It's the era of James Bond and... ooh, there we go. Let's make it 1960's spy genre!

Some evil villain kidnaps Indy to use him for his world conquest plan, involving some archaeological MacGuffin or other - details not important, we'll figure that out. Indy probably has to translate something or solve a puzzle or traps or something. Mutt finds out what has happened and sets out after Indy, calling on Indy's friends around the world to help him out. We see Mutt start to mature into a role he can inherit - world-savvy traveler and solver of mysteries, but with a secret agent bent.

Indy, of course, escapes on his own and is busy trying to defeat the villain when Mutt catches up with him. Together they're able to overpower the henchmen, take out the secret base and save the world.

...

Pure unadulterated speculation without a shred of evidence to support it, of course.

If I was writing the script, I'd use the (previously suggested) Archimedes Death Ray as the MacGuffin, with the missing piece (since it's topical) being that the mirrors are made of Orichalc (which is why the Mythbusters can't make it work), and that lost material is what Indy is needed to help find. (Slip in references to FoA at will.) That gives us scenes of translating ancient manuscripts and locations like mines and Greek ruins. And of course the villain's secret base has a giant golden mirror and rocket to launch it into space like any over the top Bond baddie would have.
 

Stoo

Well-known member
RedeemedChild said:
Man, that's beyond exciting! I mean Indiana Jones and Zombies? I'd be all over that.
You'd "be all over" Indy & zombies? The novel, Army of the Dead, came out only 2 years ago. Did you buy it?:confused:
RedeemedChild said:
@Stoo, For your fracking information I do INDEED buy Indiana Jones merchandise!
Child, this is a **** & bull statement that belongs in the Bullsh!t thread. Apart from the 2 LEGO video games & a pizza box, you have NEVER previously discussed other Indy products so if there is anything else in your collection (which is highly doubtful), it's a well-kept secret! By your own confession, purchasing official DVD releases isn't your style and you recorded the original 3 Indy films from TV. The first time you watched "Crystal Skull" was via a FREE, PIRATED copy on the internet, MORE THAN A YEAR AND A HALF after the film was released.:gun:
RedeemedChild said:
However, in the way of books I often check them out from the library simply to get a feel and see what it's like before I lay down my money for it. And I don't just do that for Indiana Jones only but for most everything be it a text books, novels, non-fiction or comics before I buy it.
More bullsh*t. In 2007, you already got the "feel" of the Secret of the Sphinx novel and thought it was "very good" but never bought it. Now, 4+ years later, you say you haven't finished reading the story because your new, local library doesn't have the book.:rolleyes:
RedeemedChild said:
Also, FYI I was away for 17 months because I busy studying and then I had to go Washington DC and deal with personal matters.
Re. "Studying": Busy studying video games? During that time, you were busy here at The Raven creating threads about Nintendo, etc. and asking people to join you on-line to play "MMORPG"s. Seems you had MORE THAN ENOUGH SPARE TIME to see "Crystal Skull" in those 17 months.:rolleyes:

Freeloaders, like Redeemed Child, are the last people who should be whining about a 5th movie & the "future of the Indy franchise".(n)(n):sick::sick:
 

Indy's brother

New member
Can I feel free to whine about post content lacking in rumors and possibilities and ask you two to yell at each other via private messages if you guys wish to continue? :sick:
 

Toht's Arm

Active member
InexorableTash said:
Agreed.

However, it does make me wonder what genre they might be thinking of. Here's what's been rumbling about in my brain for the last year, told in the form of a hypothetical story brainstorming session:

We want to make up for KOTCS. So we'll go back to the strongest sequel in the series. Last Crusade. That was a father/son story - great, since we need this to be an Indy/Mutt story. We can't have them together the whole time so one element we'll borrow is having them split up for the first half of the movie.

We can't make it "Indy looking for Mutt", we need a twist, so let's make it "Mutt looking for Indy!" Mutt's not independent and world-savvy - he's more of a bumbler - but we can play on that. This will give him a chance to grow as he's trying to track down and rescue Indy. Of course, Indy doesn't need rescuing like his dad did, so it won't be exactly the same as LC.

We need to have exotic locales - KOTCS stuck too close to home. And we can't have too many characters on the adventure like KOTCS. We should have Sallah since the audience loves him and it worked in LC. Maybe Mutt can track down Sallah for help finding Indy?

Also, this is going to be Indy's last outing, so we better have a hand-off story for Mutt. But really, we can't hand over the hat and the whip - it's the 1960s. It's the era of James Bond and... ooh, there we go. Let's make it 1960's spy genre!

Some evil villain kidnaps Indy to use him for his world conquest plan, involving some archaeological MacGuffin or other - details not important, we'll figure that out. Indy probably has to translate something or solve a puzzle or traps or something. Mutt finds out what has happened and sets out after Indy, calling on Indy's friends around the world to help him out. We see Mutt start to mature into a role he can inherit - world-savvy traveler and solver of mysteries, but with a secret agent bent.

Indy, of course, escapes on his own and is busy trying to defeat the villain when Mutt catches up with him. Together they're able to overpower the henchmen, take out the secret base and save the world.

...

Pure unadulterated speculation without a shred of evidence to support it, of course.

If I was writing the script, I'd use the (previously suggested) Archimedes Death Ray as the MacGuffin, with the missing piece (since it's topical) being that the mirrors are made of Orichalc (which is why the Mythbusters can't make it work), and that lost material is what Indy is needed to help find. (Slip in references to FoA at will.) That gives us scenes of translating ancient manuscripts and locations like mines and Greek ruins. And of course the villain's secret base has a giant golden mirror and rocket to launch it into space like any over the top Bond baddie would have.

Nice work, Inexorable Trash. I think this is a pretty good guess. I could easily imagine the beards coming up with something like that. I'd be happy with it as long as we cut to Indy frequently throughout the whole movie, unlike Henry in LC.

Where does Marion fit into this plot?

Part of me really doesn't like the James Bond/spy angle, but then again, it wasn't like KotCS sci-fi elements really made that much of a difference to the Indy formula. I guess it would be the same if they dabbled in spy movies...

And you have to consider that, as the story goes, Spielberg did say he wanted to direct a Bond picture right before Lucas pitched Indy to him...
 

Attila the Professor

Moderator
Staff member
Indy's brother said:
Can I feel free to whine about post content lacking in rumors and possibilities and ask you two to yell at each other via private messages if you guys wish to continue? :sick:

PLEASE. Feel that freedom. And hopefully they'll consider my request for the same to be more along the lines of a directive.

And Stoo, stop trying to dictate the kid's buying decisions. It's more than a little presumptuous.
 

Stoo

Well-known member
Indy's brother said:
Can I feel free to whine about post content lacking in rumors and possibilities and ask you two to yell at each other via private messages if you guys wish to continue? :sick:
Feel free to whine, Indy's brother. You have "street cred"!;) (Freeloaders don't.)
Toht's Arm said:
I'm almost certain that the use of the word "genre" was in reference to KotCS being a hat-tilt to 50s sci-fi movies, as was suggested further back in this topic. AND I would have thought that the most obvious genres that Indy 5 could borrow from would be Hammer horror (and thus the haunted castle) or the Hitchcockian "innocent man accused" stuff.

Spielberg's subsequent backpedal is probably just a way of mollifying people (who were shocked at the idea of a complete change in tone for the film) without actually giving away what kind of genre influences would likely appear.
Mr. Toht's Arm has the best sense of clarity on this subject!(y)
Attila the Professor said:
This is certainly the only interpretation which doesn't hinge upon one of the finest genre filmmakers of our day forgetting what "genre" means while speaking to the press.
Spielberg's "genre" statements are not a big deal. Afterall, Lucas & Co. (and the untold numbers of his followers) CONSTANTLY misuse the term, "McGuffin".:p(n):sick:

P.S.
Attila the Professor said:
And Stoo, stop trying to dictate the kid's buying decisions. It's more than a little presumptuous.
Redeemed Child is in his early 20s and is not a kid. Since he doesn't $pend coin on the franchise and gets his Indy dosage for FREE, then who is he to complain about the future of the Dr. Jones?:confused:
 
Last edited:

Attila the Professor

Moderator
Staff member
Stoo said:
Spielberg's "genre" statements are not a big deal. Afterall, Lucas & Co. (and the untold numbers of his followers) CONSTANTLY misuse the term, "McGuffin".:p(n):sick:

Well, they use it differently than Hitchcock does. Lucas sees a need for the MacGuffin to have some importance that comes by way of what it is, while for Hitchcock, the fact that it is important to the characters is all that's necessary. I'm not sure it's accurate to claim that as a total misuse, but rather as a different reading of it.

I'm not sure how you can claim that a slightly-off reading of "MacGuffin" means that an entirely unusual use of "genre" can be written off.
 

Montana Smith

Active member
Stoo said:
Spielberg's "genre" statements are not a big deal. Afterall, Lucas & Co. (and the untold numbers of his followers) CONSTANTLY misuse the term, "McGuffin".:p(n):sick:

I think it was Finn who explained long ago that the artifact wasn't the McGuffin, yet everything I've seen points to the contrary:

MacGuffin (a.k.a. McGuffin or maguffin) is a term for a motivating element in a story that is used to drive the plot. It actually serves no further purpose. It won't pop up again later, it won't explain the ending, it won't actually do anything except possibly distract you while you try to figure out its significance. In some cases, it won't even be shown. It is usually a mysterious package/artifact/superweapon that everyone in the story is chasing.

To determine if a thing is a MacGuffin, check to see if it is interchangeable. For example, in a caper story the MacGuffin could be either the Mona Lisa or the Hope diamond, it makes no difference which. The rest of the story (i.e. it being stolen) would be exactly the same. It doesn't matter which it is, it is only necessary for the characters to want it.

A common MacGuffin story setup can be summarized as "Quickly! We must find X before they do!".

The term was popularised by Alfred Hitchcock, who actually credited one of his screenwriters, Angus McPhail, with the creation of this concept and the name for it, citing a particular school-boy joke:

A man is riding on a train when a second gentleman gets on and sits down across from him. The first man notices the second is holding an oddly shaped package.

"What is that?" the first man asks.

"A MacGuffin, a tool used to hunt lions in the Scottish highlands."

"But there are no lions in the Scottish highlands," says the first man.

"Well then," says the other, "That's no MacGuffin".

Hitchcock and Angus McPhail were not the first to formulate this concept. Silent-film actress Pearl White starred in cliffhanger serials (most famously "The Perils of Pauline") in which the characters spent most of their screen time chasing each other for possession of a roll of film, or some other doodad. This device occurred so often in Pearl White's serial films that she routinely referred to the coveted object as a "weenie", using the term precisely as Hitchcock would later use "MacGuffin".

In academic circles this is sometimes called the Golden Fleece, after the artifact from the myth of Jason and the Argonauts. The Fleece was first mentioned by the Greek poet Simonides, which makes this trope Older Than Feudalism.

Compare Magnetic Plot Device. Contrast Mock Guffin, for when an object that isn't really a MacGuffin is mistaken for one. If it's more than just a something to keep the plot moving, it's probably a Chekhov's Gun. (Though that only counts if it's initially introduced as being unimportant.)

If you want to start arguing that your favourite series most awesome magical thing isn't a MacGuffin, remember that Tropes Are Tools. Having a MacGuffin is not necessarily Bad Writing, depending on how it's handled. Sometimes, it can even enhance the work!

McguffinCollage.jpg




http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MacGuffin

The artifacts don't conform to the defintions of Magnetic Plot Device; Mock Guffin or Chekhov's Gun. If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck...

I still think it would be odd for a director of Spielberg's experience to misue the word "genre". And since KOTCS was so obviously modelled on a specific genre, I think that's where they are headed (if they're actually heading anywhere but daydreams).

Attila the Professor said:
Well, they use it differently than Hitchcock does. Lucas sees a need for the MacGuffin to have some importance that comes by way of what it is, while for Hitchcock, the fact that it is important to the characters is all that's necessary. I'm not sure it's accurate to claim that as a total misuse, but rather as a different reading of it.

The difference is that with Lucas the object is found, so indeed it does turn up again. Yet, it is still an irrelevant something. It just needs to be attractive enough to make the characters want it.
 
Last edited:

Darth Vile

New member
I think the crystal skull was more of a traditional McGuffin... whereas I always see the 'Grail Diary' and 'Headpiece to the Staff of Ra' as the McGuffin's in Raiders and TLC respectively.
 

InexorableTash

Active member
Toht's Arm said:
Nice work, Inexorable Trash.

o_O

I think this is a pretty good guess. I could easily imagine the beards coming up with something like that. I'd be happy with it as long as we cut to Indy frequently throughout the whole movie, unlike Henry in LC.

Agreed.

Where does Marion fit into this plot?

If I was writing it, I'd leave her out, and I'd also keep the movie moving by avoiding the "back at Marshall College...." scene. If forced, though, that's the perfect spot, possibly up to and including the dramatic scene where Mutt sets off after Indy and Marion asks him to "bring him back, but be careful!" Staying behind is so un-Marionly though, but hopefully the "learn from the mistakes of KOTCS" goal remains, er, paramount.

And you have to consider that, as the story goes, Spielberg did say he wanted to direct a Bond picture right before Lucas pitched Indy to him...

Ayup.
 

foreignerfred

New member
InexorableTash said:
o_O



Agreed.



If I was writing it, I'd leave her out, and I'd also keep the movie moving by avoiding the "back at Marshall College...." scene. If forced, though, that's the perfect spot, possibly up to and including the dramatic scene where Mutt sets off after Indy and Marion asks him to "bring him back, but be careful!" Staying behind is so un-Marionly though, but hopefully the "learn from the mistakes of KOTCS" goal remains, er, paramount.



Ayup.


Your idea will not "make up" for KOTCS. It's more Mutt -- him as the central questing hero -- and less Indy. You're maximizing a gripe with KOTCS.

Give us more Indy. Less everyone else. Stop worrying up setting up Indy for the next generation, save that for the inevitable reboot/prequel. Give us a GREAT final chapter to one of the greatest film series of all time.
 

Udvarnoky

Well-known member
The interesting thing about the skull as the artifact is that it actually functions more like the Staff of Ra or the Grail Diary than it does as the primary objective. The tangible prize in Indy4 is really the lost city.
 

Indy's brother

New member
You are absolutely correct on this, Udvarnoky. It gives way to speculating on why KOTCS got such a divided reception. sure there were smaller gripes, but could it be this simple? That the crystal skull as the main artifact was not the quest item like the ark, sankara stones, and holy grail were? Could it be this that truly sullied the formula? Sounds thin, but it makes sense, too.
 

Darth Vile

New member
Udvarnoky said:
The interesting thing about the skull as the artifact is that it actually functions more like the Staff of Ra or the Grail Diary than it does as the primary objective. The tangible prize in Indy4 is really the lost city.

I agree with this too. All other issues aside, do you think a more tangible prize would have improved it... given it (the characters) more focus?
 

Indy's brother

New member
Darth Vile said:
I agree with this too. All other issues aside, do you think a more tangible prize would have improved it... given it (the characters) more focus?

Nailed it. Spalko was in it for the psychic edge, Mac was in it for the gold, Indy wasn't really trying to beat them to it for much more of a reason than "It told me to". If he was really trying to prevent the russians from achieving their goal, he could have simply buried the thing, or scurried off after the waterfall bit and come back with it later. Kind of kills the sense of urgency.

Anyway, in an attempt to keep this thread on topic, I'll say that I hope Indy 5 is more focused. I think that would go a long way towards making up for the things that didn't work in KOTCS.
 
Top