Endgame

'allo

Although it will probably prove to be a minor setback, once again Indy IV is up in the air to some unreachable point on the horizon, i think that the question has to be asked, 'Should Indy IV actually be made?'
A question that was asked frequently back in the old days but which for obvious reasons has been ignored.

Just for arguements sake lets look at the case against it being made at all:

1. AGE: I have the greatest respect for Ford etc but his career as a conventional action hero is pretty much over, i can accept a 50 something Indy but if Indy IV is delayed for much longer and we are talking about more than a year or two then Ford will physically not be able to play Indy.
I do not want to see an Indy IV if it is not going to remain true to the character.

2.WHAT IS IT FOR: The Indy trilogy is a complete story, it displays a complete charactr arc. We in this forum have tried to find a reason other for Indy IV existing beyond it being fun and all we have really come up with is an extremely dark norish story which is unlikely to occur. What is likely to occur is something that for us is at best underawing (what can top over a decade of sanctifying the trilogy and nostalgia) or at worst the trilogies bastard son. I just don't see how Indy IV can top in action Raiders or in fun and emotion LC.
Fondness for the Indy series is based largely on nostalgia of one kind or another, and i dont see how any sequel could top this.

3. TIME: Is there a point in which having a sequel becomes just slightly unfesible? 17 or 18 years seems just too long a gap maybe, without giving audiences something completely different which i doubt they are going to do.

4.LC WAS THE ENDING: LC was written as the final chapter of the Indy series old friends returned for reasons more of nostalgia than anything else (of an 8 yr old film series!) and the enigma behind Indy's personality was explained (Would he be as interesting as a character in Indy IV?) Indy was spiritually cleansed etc and then rode off into the sunset at the end of his era.
Is there any way that Indy IV can top this?

I am playing devils advocate here in some senses i do want to see Indy IV made but they are running out of time, unless they fundementally change the nature of the Indy series Ford will not be able to play Indy in another 5 years.

I agree with you Bob (at least the Devil's advocate in you) that Indy IV with HF set in the 50's etc. etc.....should not be made. I've been saying that ever since I came on this forum. It has been too damn long since the last one, HF is too old, and the fifties is not IJ's time period.

My idea has always been to wait few more years, let the hoopla over IJ "IV" die out, and then revive the ORIGINAL character in his original setting, and make more movies with a new cast.

The formula has worked very well for many other fictional characters,...Superman, Tarzan, to name just two.

In between it would be nice if Lucas could allow some new Indiana Jones fiction to come out in print; maybe by some new authors with fresh perspectives on the character (OK, that's a selfish desire.)

You're right that the trilogy is just that, a trilogy. It is the 80's trilogy with the 80's cast. It stands by itself as a work of art. But I don't think that precludes the possibility of utilizing the character again, at a future time.

As I've always said, I think the character's potential is limitless.

Indy IV with Harrison Ford in the fifties, I really could care less about it. If all this 'news' is a bunch of baloney, and they DO go ahead and make it, then hooray! (I guess) If they never make it (which I think is the more likely scenario) then that's probably better.

Despite the criticism he receives on this forum, George Lucas knows what he's doing.

My favorite topic. I'll respond in order:

1. AGE: I agree age is a factor but as I've said before Ford's age is an asset more than a liability. Some of the best movies -- like 'Rio Bravo' -- have over-the-hill hero storylines that contribute rather than detract from a film.

2.WHAT IS IT FOR: I strongly agree that there must be a story-to-tell to justify a sequel. And in the case of Indiana Jones, I can think of several. My favorite, as I've written before, would deal with the repatriation of stolen artifacts. Another related topic would be revenge. If Indiana Jones got some sort of absolution at the end of LC, I'd argue that he got off cheap. Presumably his character still has a lot to atone for on this worldly plane, and I can easily imagine villians looking to settle old score(s) with Indy (a Pale Rider-type story comes to mind here). If this type of story makes Indy IV a 'bastard son' then so be it. There are many, many better endings than the garbage we were served up with at the end of LC. I'd argue that a repatriation/revenge storyline is really where the arc has to end.

3. TIME: The Indiana Jones character is unique in that with the TV shows and the movies spanning years of Indy's life, we are shown the greater part of the character's life. So why can't there be an adventure with an Indiana Jones (ostensibly) in his mid-fifties? Placing an older Indiana Jones in the changed world of the 1950's is a great and unique opportunity to subtly show a changed world and a changed man.

4.LC WAS THE ENDING: As I said above, Indy may have been spiritually cleansed at the end of LC -- but that doesn't mean that his characther gets to live the rest of his days in peace. Arguably, this guy doesn't deserve (or -- more likely -- is incapable of) living the rest of his days in peace. I don't think it is all that hard to clear the bar set by LC. Maybe not in terms of comedy, but easily in terms of emotional impact.



[Edited by Joe Brody on 02-07-2004 at 08:17 pm]

My turn! My turn!

First, let me say that I'm extremely anxious and excited to see a fourth Indiana Jones.

1.AGE: This isn't that big a deal. All this means that Ford will be unable to do a lot of his own stunts (which he doesn't do much anyways). PLUS, maybe the action sequences will involve less fist fighting and more gun shooting (which isn't a good thing, but can be done right with stunt and body doubles for Ford that we'll never know the difference - as long as the stunts are believable for a 50 year-old-man).

2.WHAT IS IT FOR: To make another movie based on a popular character to make more money. Granted, Spielberg (and to some extent Ford) actually care about the movies they make and don't care if ANYBODY watched them. They're just practicing their art. Lucas, as we all know, just wants to make money).

3. TIME: Actually, time between the sequels will help generate more money. Star Wars Episode I was highly anticipated, and even though fans were disappointed (I wasn't. I actually liked the movie. Hated Jar Jar, but liked the movie), the movie still opened well. This time around, it's not just on Lucas, so Indy IV will be better than Star Wars I & II just because of Spielberg and Ford.

4.LC WAS THE ENDING: Yes, LC was the ending, but Indy IV can be the beginning. If done right, a protege <small>(not Short Round, though. Someone who could pull off the Indy look, but maybe update it a little) </small> could be introduced and spawn more movies and TV shows, keeping the flavor of the original and thus retaining success.





[/B][/QUOTE]

philhos said:

a protege <small>(not Short Round, though. Someone who could pull off the Indy look, but maybe update it a little) </small> .

Click to expand...

[/B][/QUOTE]

Why cant Short Round pull off the Jones look?
Shorty is the best and should be the only protege for Dr. Jones.
PS: The age of Harrison is no big factor in the makeing of an Indy4, it makes me mad when I hear fans say hes to old. Jones cant stay 30 for aver. Why cant a man have an adventure in his 50ts, 60ts or in his 70ts?

[Edited by Webley on 02-07-2004 at 12:23 pm]

I think that age is important not because there i have anything against Indiana Jones ageing, but by say 2007 Ford will be 65 and this movie is being made for fun largely they are in all probability not going to make a western like reimagining of the character, this is essentially the same character and the same sort of movie.
The particular type of adventure movies that the Indy films are are extremely physically demanding and part of the series sucess it that it seems realistic that Ford is actually doing this.
Would a less action focused Indy film actually work?
Would a film with less credibility of Ford doing action sequences work?

Agreed, Ford's age is a limitation -- but I believe that if the film is shot in the next year or so, Ford could still perform at the necessary level. There was a pretty big drop-off in Ford's physical activity for LC, and I think he could still perform at that same level of physical performance today (with perhaps a little clean-up CGI and extra double work). So to answer your questions, I think that Indy IV could be made with a LC-level of physical activity. It's safe to say we won't see Ford being dragged behind any trucks in Indy IV . . . . but rather engaged in more confined scenes, like a Key Largo style gunfight on a boat.

By citing two westerns, I wasn't proposing that the Indy character or film be reimagined to accomodate an older Harrison Ford. When it comes to talking about making action movies I tend draw from Westerns (which I classify as an Action subgenre) because so many were made. For example, I was pointing to 'Rio Bravo' as an example of a successful action film with an over-the-hill hero -- who is still successful despite his age and where his age is never really explicity addressed. 'Pale Rider' is just a great example of an older "hero" who wants to be left alone in peace but his past won't let him be. These are some of the of elements that I would like to see incorporated into Indy IV -- and neither would require any changes to the format.

So putting aside the physical issues, I would like your thoughts on the arc of the first three films. Are you really satisfied with the LC ending? Do you see the Indiana Jones character completing his journey with LC -- with life ending after he makes peace with Dad? I wish life was that simple. As I said before, Indy has enough history that he likely has things from his past that he has to resolve or atone for -- and I think that's a better place to end the series. The significance of the young Indy stuff is much debated but I for one have always attached an enormous amount of signifigance on the eye-patch worn by the old Indy. The eye-patch, for me, is a symbol that there are consequences for one's actions and that success comes at a price. While I don't expect to see Indy losing an eye in Indy IV, I do look at the eye-patch as evidence of Lucas's frame-of-mind.

Joe Brody said:

So putting aside the physical issues, I would like your thoughts on the arc of the first three films. Are you really satisfied with the LC ending? Do you see the Indiana Jones character completing his journey with LC -- with life ending after he makes peace with Dad? I wish life was that simple. As I said before, Indy has enough history that he likely has things from his past that he has to resolve or atone for -- and I think that's a better place to end the series. The significance of the young Indy stuff is much debated but I for one have always attached an enormous amount of signifigance on the eye-patch worn by the old Indy. The eye-patch, for me, is a symbol that there are consequences for one's actions and that success comes at a price. While I don't expect to see Indy losing an eye in Indy IV, I do look at the eye-patch as evidence of Lucas's frame-of-mind.

Click to expand...

Interesing thoughts Joe, particularly about the eye patch sometimes i think there is little left to be said about Indy but then someone comes along with a new perspective.

No of course i agree with you that there is scope for further adventures, but i think everyone will agree that LC presents a nice ending for a trilogy.
Indy IV would be something else, outside of those themeatic constraints....
You speak of atonement but i fear that this particular idea of Indy died with the safe character that we were presented with in LC; and by the end he was ritually clensed in a baptism like event in which he chose his father over the uber artifact and he could see beyond gold and find humility etc, there may not be any reason for him to be Indiana Jones anymore.

It may not be real life but it was a great mythic ending straight out of the hero with 1000 faces, and i dunno maybe it would just be nice to see that hero ride off into the sunset...

In practice i am all for Indy IV if it dares to be substantially different from the trilogy but i just fear that it will not be....

bob said:

. . . . by the end [Indy] was ritually clensed in a baptism like event in which [Indy] chose his father over the uber artifact and he could see beyond gold and find humility etc, there may not be any reason for him to be Indiana Jones anymore.

Click to expand...

Great post bob -- but did Indy really make a "choice" clinging as he was to Dad's hand, having just watched Elsa get her just desserts?

You break down the meaning of LC's ending better than I could -- but to show Indy making a true choice shouldn't it have been Indy leaning over the edge, with the ability to either save his father or the cup?

Joe Brody said:

bob said:

. . . . by the end [Indy] was ritually clensed in a baptism like event in which [Indy] chose his father over the uber artifact and he could see beyond gold and find humility etc, there may not be any reason for him to be Indiana Jones anymore.

Click to expand...

Great post bob -- but did Indy really make a "choice" clinging as he was to Dad's hand, having just watched Elsa get her just desserts?

You break down the meaning of LC's ending better than I could -- but to show Indy making a true choice shouldn't it have been Indy leaning over the edge, with the ability to either save his father or the cup?

Click to expand...

I suppose so but i think to have such an unambigious moral choice would be to betray the spirit of the Indy movies (as well as being a little patronising) and it does come pretty close in the final 20 minutes of LC....