General Indy 5 Thread - rumors and possibilities

[Ajax the Great]

Indiana Jones is a concept. He is an Ideal. He is forever an outlet for the imagination to wander into and get lost in fantastic adventures.

Why do so many fans seem to want to bury him?

Again, I just don't get it.

Lol, I like how you capitalize Ideal. Makes Indy seem like a god...

I think a fifth Indy should be the end of the Harrison Ford-led franchise. I also think it should be the end of Indy period, but that's just me. But Harrison should call it quits after a fifth.

 

[Indy's brother]

Harrison should call it quits after a fifth.

Second Trilogy! Second Trilogy!

 

[Ajax the Great]

Second Trilogy! Second Trilogy!

With Harrison?

To be honest, part of my reason for ending at five is that there's something nostalgic about odd numbers. Ending at 3, 5, or 7 just feels right. 6 makes me think of Star Wars.

 

[Indy's brother]

With Harrison?

To be honest, part of my reason for ending at five is that there's something nostalgic about odd numbers. Ending at 3, 5, or 7 just feels right. 6 makes me think of Star Wars.

Yes with Harrison! If I got a second trilogy I could feel satisfied that there are enough films, and not so bummed that they wasted 19 years to get to KOTCS. I couldn't care less about SW if I tried, so the number of films in that franchise has zero bearing on my opinion of Indy sequels.

After a sixth with ford, reboot, Recast Indy as younger, or as a cyborg woman from another time for all I care. Or do an entire film about the dog from whom Indy got his name. It wouldn't matter to me. But for now, it's actually possible to pull off another two, and I will pine for two more films as long as there is any chance of it happening. After it is no longer feasible, and these films have not been made, I suspect that I will turn feral and people will run from me in fear.

 

[tocksic]

Why do so many fans seem to want to bury him?

Again, I just don't get it.

Because Harrison is Indy! (I respect the fans of Young Indy - but there still are so many people who never felt very comfortable with the show.)

Because Harrison's time among the living is limited. (Sure he could portray Indy until he is 95, but Indy is a character of activity, not of growing sedate.)

Because many fans feel Indy is bound to Harrison like heat to sun.

Because "ending" the whole thing would give more prevention of George Lucas going Jar Jar on Indys a**.

Maybe you don't agree with people that only accept Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones (and you don't have to) - but "just not getting it" makes me wonder if you have ever looked upon this issue beyond your own nose.

Just because someone loves the Indy franchise, doesn't mean he has to keep it alive by all means, sticking needles and tubes into the body, pumping it with medication and calling that state "alive". It would make Indiana Jones a farce for people who like Indy as he always was.

Again: You don't have to agree with this point of view. But their is a difference between agreement and traceability.

I personally wouldn't care if there is one more movie, two or three. But at some point they have to stop. And that point should be before Harrison is overly geriatric or before George Lucas ruined the franchise by making it a Frankenstein-like monster only kept alive by weired and stupid ideas.

P.S. It's not about burying - it's about giving honorable closure. Saying "we" want to bury the franchise implicates that "we" are somewhat evil, nasty or begrudging. Total nonsense!

 

[Johnny Nys]

The franchise is more than just the movies. Ending the movies part of the franchise with Harrison comes natural to me. But the character of Indiana Jones can still be portrayed through other forms, like books and games (although after a while, yet another new adventure somewhere in the middle of an already very full "career", so to speak, is far from believable).

But do the movies need a real "ending", in the sense of delivering a message at the end of the final movie clearly stating, "That's it, folks! No more movies for this guy!". No, I'd rather have a final movie with a complete adventure, with only the end of that particular adventure. Whatever happens to Indy next, leave it to the imagination of the fans.

I don't think anyone really believed that the Joneses riding into the sunset was the last thing that character (in that character's world) would do. Neither is walking out of the church. He'll still do things, but do his actions necessarily have to be translated to the screen? No.

 

[Darth Vile]

But do the movies need a real "ending", in the sense of delivering a message at the end of the final movie clearly stating, "That's it, folks! No more movies for this guy!". No, I'd rather have a final movie with a complete adventure, with only the end of that particular adventure. Whatever happens to Indy next, leave it to the imagination of the fans.

I don't think anyone really believed that the Joneses riding into the sunset was the last thing that character (in that character's world) would do. Neither is walking out of the church. He'll still do things, but do his actions necessarily have to be translated to the screen? No.

Totally agree Johnny. It's all about the imagination. Movies shouldn't close doors, they should open them...

 

[monkey]

Because Harrison is Indy! (I respect the fans of Young Indy - but there still are so many people who never felt very comfortable with the show.)

Because Harrison's time among the living is limited. (Sure he could portray Indy until he is 95, but Indy is a character of activity, not of growing sedate.)

Because many fans feel Indy is bound to Harrison like heat to sun.

Because "ending" the whole thing would give more prevention of George Lucas going Jar Jar on Indys a**.

Maybe you don't agree with people that only accept Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones (and you don't have to) - but "just not getting it" makes me wonder if you have ever looked upon this issue beyond your own nose.

Just because someone loves the Indy franchise, doesn't mean he has to keep it alive by all means, sticking needles and tubes into the body, pumping it with medication and calling that state "alive". It would make Indiana Jones a farce for people who like Indy as he always was.

Again: You don't have to agree with this point of view. But their is a difference between agreement and traceability.

I personally wouldn't care if there is one more movie, two or three. But at some point they have to stop. And that point should be before Harrison is overly geriatric or before George Lucas ruined the franchise by making it a Frankenstein-like monster only kept alive by weired and stupid ideas.

P.S. It's not about burying - it's about giving honorable closure. Saying "we" want to bury the franchise implicates that "we" are somewhat evil, nasty or begrudging. Total nonsense!

Not sure if maybe we're not saying the same thing here Tocksic.

Except for the part where you say the "at some point they have to stop".

Really? They HAVE to stop making Indiana Jones films? Really? I don't agree.

Certainly they have to stop making Indiana Jones movies with Harrison Ford playing the leading role. They had about a 25 year window, and decided to make TWO films in that window. Not enough. which is the reason why so many Indiana Jones fans are so frustrated with the whole thing.

Me included.

By the way........."makes me wonder if you have ever looked upon this issue beyond your own nose".

Not really sure what you mean by this. Please feel free to explain.

 

[Grizzlor]

Lucas, Spielberg, and Ford are film makers, that's what they do. They love working on the Indy films. If they get a good story they like, they'll shoot it. It's that simple. They aren't motivated by perception, KOTCS redemption, huge money in any great way. They enjoy making movies. I don't even think about it anymore. If they decide to go forward, I'll be ecstatic, if not, I won't go crazy.

 

[Ajax the Great]

Lucas, Spielberg, and Ford are film makers, that's what they do. They love working on the Indy films. If they get a good story they like, they'll shoot it. It's that simple. They aren't motivated by perception, KOTCS redemption, huge money in any great way. They enjoy making movies. I don't even think about it anymore. If they decide to go forward, I'll be ecstatic, if not, I won't go crazy.

That's probably the best way to go about Indy 5. But I do think that the money factor is significant. With CS they found a new audience base - little kids. Little kids who'll drag their parents to the movie theater too, meaning more tickets sold. Little kids who'll want more and more Indy merchandise, and parents will pay. There's a potential huge financial gain in an Indy 5, and I think it overshadows the "fun" of film-making. A success is always defined as the amount of money made. If a sucky movie makes tons of money, the makers don't care about the critical reception. All that matters is that audiences saw it.

 

[Hanselation]

Indiana Jones 5 = Anything goes!

Todays idea: Indiana Jones 5, playing in the early 60th starts with this song:

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/LOsZB5biAnY&hl=de_DE&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/LOsZB5biAnY&hl=de_DE&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>


And Indy would say: This song awakes memories.

 

[Indy's brother]

Todays idea: Indiana Jones 5, playing in the early 60th starts with this song:

Interesting, but too derivative for my liking

 

[Darth Vile]

That's probably the best way to go about Indy 5. But I do think that the money factor is significant. With CS they found a new audience base - little kids. Little kids who'll drag their parents to the movie theater too, meaning more tickets sold. Little kids who'll want more and more Indy merchandise, and parents will pay. There's a potential huge financial gain in an Indy 5, and I think it overshadows the "fun" of film-making. A success is always defined as the amount of money made. If a sucky movie makes tons of money, the makers don't care about the critical reception. All that matters is that audiences saw it.

I'm not too certain what the demographic is, but I'd imagine that Harrison Ford, as he is now, has much more appeal to an older audience than he does a younger one. I'd go as far as to say that a big factor of KOTCS box office success was, in part, due to dads pulling along their kids to see the movie, rather than a ground swell in kid interest (kids who probably have much more affinity with Harry Potter, Iron Man etc.).

That's not a criticism by the way, just more an honest observation.

 

[Lance Quazar]

I'm not too certain what the demographic is, but I'd imagine that Harrison Ford, as he is now, has much more appeal to an older audience than he does a younger one. I'd go as far as to say that a big factor of KOTCS box office success was, in part, due to dads pulling along their kids to see the movie, rather than a ground swell in kid interest (kids who probably have much more affinity with Harry Potter, Iron Man etc.).

That's not a criticism by the way, just more an honest observation.

I think you're absolutely right. I don't think KOTCS spawned the next generation of young Indy fans. The nostalgia factor/older audience was MUCH more significant. Granted, it was a family movie that adults could bring their kids to.

But clamoring hordes of young Indy-philes never materialized. Interest in merchandising was very short lived (just look at the Hasbro figures.)

I think another outing would find an even tougher time appealing to either audience. Many were burned on KOTCS. Even for those that weren't, the novelty factor of seeing Indy again after so long has worn off.

And the movie really didn't implant the franchise in the long-term memories of modern movie goers.

 

[Indy's brother]

I'm not too certain what the demographic is, but I'd imagine that Harrison Ford, as he is now, has much more appeal to an older audience than he does a younger one. I'd go as far as to say that a big factor of KOTCS box office success was, in part, due to dads pulling along their kids to see the movie, rather than a ground swell in kid interest (kids who probably have much more affinity with Harry Potter, Iron Man etc.).

Yeah, I agree with you on this. I'm sure there was a bit of an effort to keep KOTCS accessible to a younger audience, but I don't think it was necessarily a driving force in it's creation. After evolving into the more serious director that he now is, SS probably missed his mark in his effort to recapture his recollection of the innocence of his Indiana Jones filmaking experience. The cornball humor in the script feels like an unfortunate by-product of a screenplay that had been kicked around for too many years with too many writers. I would like to point a finger directly at Koepp or GL, or SS for that, but I can't be so vain as to assume who the culprit is, or that the blame falls solely on one person. They just stewed the pot too long on this one. If they can get another installment on screen within a couple of years, which is the small time frame they have to work with now, I truly believe it will be more focused and have a closer tone to the OT. There simply won't be enough time to over-think things and shoehorn more and more incongruous elements into it.

 

[Indy's brother]

I think another outing would find an even tougher time appealing to either audience. Many were burned on KOTCS. Even for those that weren't, the novelty factor of seeing Indy again after so long has worn off.

The opportunity to see a new IJ adventure on the big screen certainly brought people to the theater. Nostalgia was definitely a factor, but I believe that if another film was made and was good enough, it could bring a comparable draw. Those same people that felt they "were burned" would like to see something better. "Oh the new Indy is so much better than Crystal Skull!" that would pack 'em in. Also, while KOTCS may not have been broadly venerated by hardcore fans, casual moviegoers liked it. In fact, I have only heard harsh criticism of it from fans and movie critics. KOTCS made a mint, it wasn't just us going to see it.

And the movie really didn't implant the franchise in the long-term memories of modern movie goers.

You are right about that, to be sure.

 

[Darth Vile]

I think another outing would find an even tougher time appealing to either audience. Many were burned on KOTCS. Even for those that weren't, the novelty factor of seeing Indy again after so long has worn off.

And the movie really didn't implant the franchise in the long-term memories of modern movie goers.

Yeah - Regardless of wether one thinks KOTCS is good, bad or average, I think it's a given that any potential Indy V will need to do something different in order to sustain interest. That "difference" may be something more outlandish, something darker/more serious or even the death of Indy, but simply making KOTCS part II won't garner much interest at this stage, even for those who enjoyed KOTCS.

Yeah, I agree with you on this. I'm sure there was a bit of an effort to keep KOTCS accessible to a younger audience, but I don't think it was necessarily a driving force in it's creation. After evolving into the more serious director that he now is, SS probably missed his mark in his effort to recapture his recollection of the innocence of his Indiana Jones filmaking experience. The cornball humor in the script feels like an unfortunate by-product of a screenplay that had been kicked around for too many years with too many writers. I would like to point a finger directly at Koepp or GL, or SS for that, but I can't be so vain as to assume who the culprit is, or that the blame falls solely on one person. They just stewed the pot too long on this one. If they can get another installment on screen within a couple of years, which is the small time frame they have to work with now, I truly believe it will be more focused and have a closer tone to the OT. There simply won't be enough time to over-think things and shoehorn more and more incongruous elements into it.

I think Spielberg/Lucas did absolutely the right thing in bringing in Shia for KOTCS (and they'll need to do something similar for Indy V). As ultimately, how can any kid in 2009/2012 relate to Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones? He's still 'da man', of course, but to a kid he looks like Obi-Wan (as in Alec Guinness).

 

[Montana Smith]

I think you're absolutely right. I don't think KOTCS spawned the next generation of young Indy fans. The nostalgia factor/older audience was MUCH more significant. Granted, it was a family movie that adults could bring their kids to.

But clamoring hordes of young Indy-philes never materialized. Interest in merchandising was very short lived (just look at the Hasbro figures.)

I think another outing would find an even tougher time appealing to either audience. Many were burned on KOTCS. Even for those that weren't, the novelty factor of seeing Indy again after so long has worn off.

And the movie really didn't implant the franchise in the long-term memories of modern movie goers.

I agree with you part of the way, Lance. The reason that KOTCS didn't find the kind of support that Lucas would have been hoping for, was that he was spreading himself thinly by attempting to appeal to both old and new.

I'm pretty sure that The Phantom Menace is generally the least liked of the three Star Wars prequels for the same reason. It might be just a personal opinion, but I believe that the prequels got better with each each release (though none appeal to me in the same way that the original trilogy did).

So, this is where I disagree with you. If Lucas is going to do Indy V and VI, I expect that the films will get better. KOTCS brought Indy back to major public attention on the big screen after a long absence, so it ought to be easier to continue Indy's story now that he's fresh in the minds of the younger audience.

As you know, I wasn't offended by KOTCS, and accept the ideas behind the wild events portrayed. I expect that Indy V will feel more natural to older fans, and will also bring back the youngsters who got into KOTCS and bought the toys.

With kids, without a continuing franchise in some form, such as the Animated Clone Wars, maybe they aren't drawn to the toys. Hence the sudden drop-off of the Indy toys, and the sad demise of Hasbro's Toht etc. It's indicative that the 'toys' still being sold are those at the higher 'collectable' end, such as Sideshow and Medicom, which are marketed more towards the older teen and adult market (those to whom nostalgia may be more of a factor).

My only fear is that Lucas will still be worried about losing his younger audience, who may be un-inspired by an old guy in the lead role. Mutt was inserted into KOTCS as an obvious youthful hero to appeal more to children, just as the awful child Anakin did the same job in The Phantom Menace.

At the very least, the end of KOTCS proved that Indy wasn't willing to give up his role to a young upstart. There's still life in the old dog yet!

 

[Indy's brother]

How about this. The Bad Guy mentality of ROTLA and LC were the one dimensional Nazi archetype. Now that the current era for Indy is the Red Scare, how about a plot that involves a little more intrigue, some paranoia. Every ally he has is a potential spy, and in the end it turns out they were all his allies, and HE was the unwitting puppet for the commies? On the surface, it sounds like LC, but with the backdrop of the iron curtain, it could make for more of a menace....

 

[Montana Smith]

How about this. The Bad Guy mentality of ROTLA and LC were the one dimensional Nazi archetype. Now that the current era for Indy is the Red Scare, how about a plot that involves a little more intrigue, some paranoia. Every ally he has is a potential spy, and in the end it turns out they were all his allies, and HE was the unwitting puppet for the commies? On the surface, it sounds like LC, but with the backdrop of the iron curtain, it could make for more of a menace....

How about Mutt goes to college and gets recruited by the Russians and turns against his greedy capitalist father!

Khrushchev was the Soviet president whilst the events of KOTCS were taking place, and was still president until October 1964, which will be within the time period of Indy V. Spalko's failure at Akator might be viewed as a grudge against Indy, since the facts of how Spalko died would not be known for sure by the Soviets. Indy would bound to be blamed.