General Indy 5 Thread - rumors and possibilities

[Udvarnoky]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/sean-connery-does-not-alzheimers-2226896

 

[kongisking]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/sean-connery-does-not-alzheimers-2226896

On the bright side: Thank flippin' God that Sir Sean's still doing well.

On the dark side: I want to punch the slimeball reporter who made up that story. What a piece of filth.

 

[Pale Horse]

...and Harrison Ford has cancer...there's still that.

But I thought this was Indy V possibilities. Not Sean Connery Health Updates for a series he's been killed off in.

 

[Moedred]

he's been killed off

Yes, definitely dead. Just like Abner Ravenwood.

 

[Olliana]

Never trust the German BILD. Just... don't.

 

[HovitosKing]

Because trust me, the reboot is inevitable. In Hollywood, after all, money talks. From a financial perspective, this is as good as guaranteed.

I'm not convinced there are enough Indiana Jones fans left to make the studio execs want to bet on a reboot. However, I agree with everything else as stated.

 

[Stoo]

What a tangled web you weave. Then expect me to give up so you can call me a coward for running away, or make me continue to dance with you so that you can bring me down to
your level.

Brother, you're not thinking straight. I can't "make" you do anything. You are your own master (unless you really DO think that I am "almighty") and you went to that level on your own decision, by answering with snark from the start.

You mean you didn't see that post where I said you had a knack for splitting hairs? Sure you did. That's the one where I compared you to a bickersome ball and chain. You just mentioned it in your last post. And you call me delusional.

Your quips didn't "question my opinions" because: 1) they weren't questions and 2) they were a response to the facts & observations that I had stated. (The only opinion that I gave was in agreement with your own). Plus, you DIDN'T compare me to a "bickersome ball and chain", you compared me to YOUR WIFE!

Says the guy who has never been scornful, or personal, or disrespectful to any members here, who wanted to talk about Indiana Jones. Ever. I think I mentioned hypocrite in my last post. You can scroll to find it.

Merely POINTING OUT THE FACT that you made scornful remarks is not an example of hypocrisy. (Saying that you SHOULDN'T make scornful remarks would be hypocrital of me...but I didn't do that.)

I never said you bragged about your post count. I believe I used the word "perceived" in my last post, you can scroll. Oh wait, you used it to, never mind, it's right there, as I itemize the defense you demand out of your sheer lack of humility.

This is mumbo-jumbo nonsense. Hooray, you used the word, "perceived", and I quoted you. So what? To repeat (& elaborate), post counts are irrelevant when determining a person's worth ("perceived" or otherwise) so mentioning mine was a useless remark/criticism. The matter of my post numbers is your own 'perception' because I don't give a toss about them. Capito?

YES! I have! Which is evidence of nothing more than I have simply grown to dislike you. And if the world makes more sense to you by me doing it, I'll apologize if you like for anything nice I have said to you.

Well, that's a shame. I thought we were friends. This "dislike" must have grown over the last year because you weren't showing it in 2012 and my personality/behaviour hasn't changed since then so the issue must have more to do with you than it does with me.

Awesome that you brought up that pic on FB, because if I recall, you demanded that I give you credit for it.

Not that I would lie about something like this, but since you seem completely unaware of your ego problem:

Hey, you brought it up, and are trying to use your own actions against me.

Posting that private message just backfired in your own face, Brother!

About your "lie" comment: You certainly didn't tell the truth because there was no "demand" for credit. I asked you politely & privately *8* months after seeing the image on your Facebook page. Giving credit is normal so there's no shame in asking. A modest request is not a demand.

- Notice how I didn't ask you publicly in your Indy 5 Facebook thread here at The Raven.
- Notice how I didn't put a prominent signature on the image.
- Notice that I didn't ask for my real name to be used in the credit.
- Notice that I never inquired about the lack of credit in the 1st place.

- Also notice that I never mentioned your near-plagirism/homage to my words about someone getting sliced up in an aerosled propellor:

2009 March - Stoo on The Raven (which was quoted by you a week later in the same thread)
"I'm seeing red on white."
2010 April - Indy's brother on Facebook
"Red blood. White snow."

Regarding my "ego problem": YOU seem to be the one who has a problem with it, not me. (Not to mention that your ego isn't exactly microscopic, dude.)

Why do I have to explain the definition of the word cliffhanger to, of all people, you. When the context was right there in my original post.

Why explain? Because I obviously misunderstood and you didn't bother to address it. If an explanation wasn't needed then, once again, you must surely think that I am "almighty"!

Plus, the dictionary excerpt that you presented in bold is the term's SECONDARY definition. My usage is its NO. 1 DEFINITION, dude! Here at The Raven, the use of phrases such as, "BASED ON cliffhangers", is commonly in reference to the classic serials.

Why do I have to explain a what I mean by you splitting hairs over the usage of that word. Because you need it, apparently.

Please stay on track. You were never asked to explain your "splitting hairs" quip. I thought it was a comment about my presentation of Indy's equal damage in "Crusade" and "Skull".

It's a cheap cop out to say. You found a way to mention Indy 5 page that no one was talking about, (as if it's the only one out there) and tried to connect it to your reply to try and close your response with a personal dig. Why mine? Did it bring anything into the discussion? Not a thing. Watching you try to weasel your way out of that one is pretty lame. Even for you.

Pay attention, Indy's brother. I did not deny that it was a personal dig. I was explaining how your page was RELEVANT to the thread.

Why YOUR Facebook thing? Because it's the only website that I know of which is dedicated solely to Indy 5...and I WAS talking to YOU. It also shares a similar element to the Daily Telegraph poll, which is; the number of people who want a 5th film. (Needless to say, neither of the numbers have any bearing on whether the movie will be made or not so why do the Telegraph poll results excite you so much?)

Also, people were talking about Ford being dead and he will most likely pass away by the time your page reaches its goal of 1,000,000. (That's relevance from an oblique angle.)

That's. That's just weird.

Whatever, stronzo, but it's not weird to inform you that I wouldn't be replying for awhile due to vacation. Speaking of that, were you dreaming about Indy 5 while I was on top of the highest volcano in Europe, 2 weeks ago? Indy should go to Mt. Etna in the next movie. That would be AWESOME!

---
None of this changes the fact that the damage Indy sustains in "Skull" is pretty much equal to "Crusade". If Indy gets hurt badly in Indy 5, it'll be the first time since "Doom" (and not "Crusade", as you previously stated).

 

[Pale Horse]

TL,DR

I'M RIGHT! YOU'RE WRONG!
NO I'M RIGHT! YOU'RE WRONG!

AD NASEUM

 

[Stoo]

TL,DR

Apparently, I have a problem understanding what certain people write and don't know the meaning of this internet-nerd acronym. Can you please spell it out for me, Pale, or should I research it via Google, instead? Any help would be appreciated.

---
On Topic:
Indy 5! Indy 5! Indy 5! Who gives a tinker's cuss about the TV show, novels, comics, etc.? JUST GIVE ME ANOTHER MOVIE WITH HARRISON FORD!!! YEAH!!! THAT'S ALL I CARE ABOUT!!!!

 

[Montana Smith]

Apparently, I have a problem understanding what certain people write and don't know the meaning of this internet-nerd acronym. Can you please spell it out for me, Pale, or should I research it via Google, instead? Any help would be appreciated.

tl;dr









But I did anyway!

 

[Indy's brother]

TL,DR

I'M RIGHT! YOU'RE WRONG!
NO I'M RIGHT! YOU'RE WRONG!

AD NASEUM

Not really. A bag of hot air is just that. And it doesn't deserve my attention any further. So, I will do something that Stool is incapable of and shut up. Sometimes it sucks being a grown up.

 

[Stoo]

Dreams about a 5th Indiana Jones film have tremendous worth. Keep them coming, fellow Indy brothers!

Let's do a rain dance for a new film:

Indy 5! Indy 5! Indy 5!
All we care about is
Indy 5! Indy 5! Indy 5!
Nothing else matters but
Indy 5! Indy 5! Indy 5!
Don't stop. Don't quit.
Indy 5! Indy 5! Indy 5!
Just give me my INDY FIVE!

FIVE! FIVE! FIVE! FIVE! FIVE!
Just give me Indy 5!
Just give me Fi-i-i-ive!

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/3fzCnTg3kkA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[Mickiana]

Despite the tiffs, we want the same thing, except maybe for that sobering rebel, Monty. But the rest of us want more Indy, no matter how little blood is left in the stone!

 

[Le Saboteur]

Though now that Disney owns Lucasfilm, why don't we talk about the possibility of a reboot, using the old Tron 2.0 Legacy technology...

Because, if serious, it would continue the prima facie evidence parade that The Raven is, first and foremost, a Harrison Ford fetish site.

Despite the tiffs, we want the same thing, except maybe for that sobering rebel, Monty. But the rest of us want more Indy, no matter how little blood is left in the stone!

Sure, we all might like a new Indy picture but the genre doesn't begin and end with The Man in the Hat. It's a medium-spanning genre, and there's a lot to talk about.

 

[Mickiana]

re Le Sab,

That's right. I have always felt that there is too much Harrison love here. I love him as Indy of course, but if they choose a new, younger actor to make movies set in some of the earlier time gaps in the IJ chronology, I would be also happy. A good story done in the good old way is what I'm after, whether with Harry hobbling around in another one or new blood breathing years long life in new adventures.

Excuse me for being slow, but could you expand on your phrase, "medium spanning genre"? Are you referring to video games and Park themes, etc?

 

[Le Saboteur]

...but if they choose a new, younger actor to make movies set in some of the earlier time gaps in the IJ chronology, I would be also happy. A good story done in the good old way is what I'm after, whether with Harry hobbling around in another one or new blood breathing years long life in new adventures.

The underlined is the inevitable forestalled by the fetishists. If the series has any legs it's going to happen. Needs to happen. Ford & The Beards will be taking the dirt nap in the near future, then what? Necromancy & voodoo? Enough rending of garments happens here already.

Yes, a good story is the most important element. The creative team, however, is not up to that task anymore. They've either lost the taste for the series, or their sensibilities have shifted.

Excuse me for being slow, but could you expand on your phrase, "medium spanning genre"? Are you referring to video games and Park themes, etc?

Sure.

Indiana Jones firmly belongs to the action-adventure genre, and as a genre it's about 130 years old. Full-stop. In that time period any number of works/characters/whatever have appeared in all forms of popular media at any given time. The most casual of glances will show that Indy & Allan Quatemaine have appeared in novels, comics, television, and movies. Tarzan has some 21-novels, numerous film & teevee productions, & comics. I think I even heard a radio play at one time.

The Shadow & The Phantom have appeared in all mediums as well. Same for Doc Savage. His stories number at least seventy-five. Now, Uncharted, Tomb Raider, & others are picking up where their forebears left off in this digital age of ours via video games. From there they've branched into more traditional forms of media.

In short, there's a lot more than Indiana Jones to talk about. It's the failing of the membership here (whether intentional or not) to expand on this narrow obsession with Harrison Ford and pummelin' Naht-zee's.

Just look at this thread here. You (now) have 240-pages of non-information aside from "Yeah, we're thinking about it."

 

[Montana Smith]

Yes, a good story is the most important element.

And a good story can be had without involving Indiana Jones at all. As you wrote, there have been plenty of other characters created over the last 130 years. Also room enough for new ones. However, the shadow of Indy is so large in this genre that new characters will be compared to him. Cinematically the shadow is Harrison Ford's.

The Shadow, The Rocketeer, The Phantom, The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, all period films, yet all dwarfed by Indiana Jones.

The two main options either involve shoe-horning an older actor into an almost specifically younger role; or a new actor passing himself off as the character viewers have become familiar with.

A third option is a complete reboot, starting the legend from the beginning Bond-style. I can't imagine that would be popular, but it's what happened to Tarzan in the years since Burroughs conceived him. And also to the various super heroes created from the 1930s onwards.

I can see why there was a reluctance to push forward with Indy 5, and why it took so long to get around to Indy 4. The moment passed after 1989. The YIJC was a novelty hanging on a famous fictional name. KOTCS hung its hat on the same name. Yet they're fabrications tacked onto a trilogy, just as TOD and TLC were fabrications tacked onto ROTLA.

An Indiana Jones film will be an expensive project, since his heritage demands it. Without Harrison it's a risky gamble. With Harrison it's now also a risky gamble.

Marketing a new character is also a gamble. Which is probably why there have been so many reboot movies of late. They're banking on established names.

Indy is fairly unique in this regard, since he was - barring the novelization - 'born' with Harrison. The character is a relatively recent phenomenon, being just over three decades old. When you read an Indy novel covering the period 1930 onwards who do you picture in your mind as you follow the words?

The Raven is a fetish club for Indiana Jones fans. It's natural that a large proportion of the membership demand another film involving Indiana Jones. Yet there seems to be no genuine interest in satisfying that need.

Indy is currently in retirement.

Other characters will have to fulfil that demand to take us on similarly themed adventures. Yet they will all be attempting to escape Indy's shadow.

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

then what? Necromancy & voodoo?

I sense an Indy 5 plot percolating...

 

[Stoo]

Despite the tiffs, we want the same thing, except maybe for that sobering rebel, Monty. But the rest of us want more Indy, no matter how little blood is left in the stone!

Most of us want a 5th film but the desire is not always on the same level. Personally, I would be pleased if a new one gets made but am not (and never have been) waiting with baited breath like some people are. Scouring the internet for news & analyzing every comment one of the filmmakers says about Indy 5 is not my cup o' tea and I certainly don't get angry at George Lucas for the lack of development (as certain Ravenheads do).

If another movie with Ford eventually gets made, then most everyone will be happy. If it doesn't, I won't feel let down because I'm not expecting anything. Whereas, the voracious "wishers" will have suffered years of stress & discouragement for nothing.

The Raven is a fetish club for Indiana Jones fans. It's natural that a large proportion of the membership demand another film involving Indiana Jones. Yet there seems to be no genuine interest in satisfying that need.

The "demand" & "need" that you mention are both contentious. Nobody "needs" another because they will live without one and no Raven member is in a position to "demand" it because Lucas, the story writer, is not their personal slave.

Sure, we all might like a new Indy picture but the genre doesn't begin and end with The Man in the Hat. It's a medium-spanning genre, and there's a lot to talk about.

True. Adventure genre aside, ever notice that the Ravenheads who clamour the loudest for a 5th film show no interest in the Indiana Jones books, comics & TV show, etc.?

Just look at this thread here. You (now) have 240-pages of non-information aside from "Yeah, we're thinking about it."

Right. The news is: There is no news.

 

[Pale Horse]

Because, if serious, it would continue the prima facie evidence parade that The Raven is, first and foremost, a Harrison Ford fetish site...

Stop bringing Stoo's Barbara Striesand video into this.

I sense an Indy 5 plot percolating...

<object width="32" height="32" class="hark_player">
<param name="movie" value="http://cdn.hark.com/swfs/player_32x32.swf?pid=lcvtgbjghv"/>
<param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"/>
<param name="allownetworking" value="all"/>
<param name="wmode" value="transparent"/>
<embed src="http://cdn.hark.com/swfs/player_32x32.swf?pid=lcvtgbjghv" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allownetworking="all" width="32" height="32" wmode="transparent"></embed>
</object><br/>
<a href="http://www.hark.com/clips/lcvtgbjghv-are-you-trying-to-develop-a-sense-of-humor" style="font-size: 9px; color: #ddd;" title="Listen to on Hark.com"></a>