I realize this isnt the prevailing viewpoint, but I do not feel a fourth Indy film would be benifical to the series, or as good as it should be. The trilogy as a whole is complete, and each film has gone down as classic. A fourth film made more than a decade later would not share the same fate, and, espically if Harrison Ford does not return as Indiana Jones, might look like a remake trying to ride a horse that returned to the stable years ago. Thats not to say Indiana Jones isnt popular or relevant, there is not question he is both and will go down as one of the quitenssential American heroes. A fourth film jepordizes this, by taking Indiana out of his element that he pays homage to, the 1930's. For this reason alone, Indiana Jones cannot work as a series like James Bond does, for as much as some wish.
The Bond films were based on novels, and the successive way in which the films were released, yearly and then to every 18 months, provided for a constant re-enforcement of his world. This led to Bond bonds adaptability to actor and societial changes, which took a very long time after Connery left the role. Due to the length between the trilogy and a fourth film, there is no time to adapt Indy to todays form of movie making, heavy CGI, extreme stunts etc, and I dont think we would want him to be either.
As a whole, the triology is complete. The Last Crusade ended with Indy riding off into the sunset. The intention was three films, and both Speilberg and the crew, although sometimes reluctantly, fulfilled their obligation. There is no guarentee Speilberg would want to do it again, and to ask Harrison Ford, who is pushing 60 to do it again, would be utterly ridicioulus. They have moved on from the series, and are no longer at a point in time where they feel like they could do it. Even during the trilogy, Spielbergs comments alluded to his feeling older and less capable to direct a film when he looked at Chris Columbus's script.
On the subject of Harrison, he is now a grandfather. Indiana Jones really doesnt seem like the grandfather type. Even so, the stunts and adventure elements in a fourth Indy would have to be so tame for Harrison to do it, no piece of it could ever compare to the thrilling truck chase in Raiders, the battles in The Temple of Doom, and the tank chase in The Last Crusade. And with Vic Armstrong working on the new Bond film, you would have to find a stuntman also around Harrisons age who would be willing to do such a thing. I'm no expert on film making, but Im sure finding a 60 year old stuntman is like finding a virgin in a maternity ward. So that leaves you with two choices, you can either alienate your fan base by using a lot of CGI, remember the reaction Die Another Day and all of the recent Star Wars films have recieved because of that. Or, you can get a new Indiana Jones.
Some see this as a viable solution, they cite Bond as their precedent. But, once again, its different. The transition in the Bond series from Sean Connery, to Lazenby and to Roger Moore cost ten years and four films of finicial and creative doldrums from the series. At one point, there was a period where three Bond films used three different Bond actors. The series really wasnt a stable cash cow again until The Spy Who Loved Me, ten years after You Only Live Twice where Connery first said "never again." Looking back on the distance between the first three Indy films, the idea of a successful transition to another actor the first time out almost two decades after the end of the triology is a bad idea, plain and simple. The public wont go for it. Yes, we Indy fans who own the triology and watch the documentaries until we're blue in the face will go see it, but when your trying to sell it to a studio, its the general audience thats the target. They wont go for it. And as a fan I dont think I would either.
Indy will forever be Harrison Ford in my mind as in many others, and there isnt a way he could be in a fourth film and have it be anything resembling the classic formula from the triology. He would be taken out of his element, and the film would go down as the bastard child among the four. I have no doubt it would make people hold back their praise for calling the entire series of Indiana Jones "classic."
The Bond films were based on novels, and the successive way in which the films were released, yearly and then to every 18 months, provided for a constant re-enforcement of his world. This led to Bond bonds adaptability to actor and societial changes, which took a very long time after Connery left the role. Due to the length between the trilogy and a fourth film, there is no time to adapt Indy to todays form of movie making, heavy CGI, extreme stunts etc, and I dont think we would want him to be either.
As a whole, the triology is complete. The Last Crusade ended with Indy riding off into the sunset. The intention was three films, and both Speilberg and the crew, although sometimes reluctantly, fulfilled their obligation. There is no guarentee Speilberg would want to do it again, and to ask Harrison Ford, who is pushing 60 to do it again, would be utterly ridicioulus. They have moved on from the series, and are no longer at a point in time where they feel like they could do it. Even during the trilogy, Spielbergs comments alluded to his feeling older and less capable to direct a film when he looked at Chris Columbus's script.
On the subject of Harrison, he is now a grandfather. Indiana Jones really doesnt seem like the grandfather type. Even so, the stunts and adventure elements in a fourth Indy would have to be so tame for Harrison to do it, no piece of it could ever compare to the thrilling truck chase in Raiders, the battles in The Temple of Doom, and the tank chase in The Last Crusade. And with Vic Armstrong working on the new Bond film, you would have to find a stuntman also around Harrisons age who would be willing to do such a thing. I'm no expert on film making, but Im sure finding a 60 year old stuntman is like finding a virgin in a maternity ward. So that leaves you with two choices, you can either alienate your fan base by using a lot of CGI, remember the reaction Die Another Day and all of the recent Star Wars films have recieved because of that. Or, you can get a new Indiana Jones.
Some see this as a viable solution, they cite Bond as their precedent. But, once again, its different. The transition in the Bond series from Sean Connery, to Lazenby and to Roger Moore cost ten years and four films of finicial and creative doldrums from the series. At one point, there was a period where three Bond films used three different Bond actors. The series really wasnt a stable cash cow again until The Spy Who Loved Me, ten years after You Only Live Twice where Connery first said "never again." Looking back on the distance between the first three Indy films, the idea of a successful transition to another actor the first time out almost two decades after the end of the triology is a bad idea, plain and simple. The public wont go for it. Yes, we Indy fans who own the triology and watch the documentaries until we're blue in the face will go see it, but when your trying to sell it to a studio, its the general audience thats the target. They wont go for it. And as a fan I dont think I would either.
Indy will forever be Harrison Ford in my mind as in many others, and there isnt a way he could be in a fourth film and have it be anything resembling the classic formula from the triology. He would be taken out of his element, and the film would go down as the bastard child among the four. I have no doubt it would make people hold back their praise for calling the entire series of Indiana Jones "classic."
Last edited:
)
