The Trouble City Forums
INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion - Printable Version

+- The Trouble City Forums (http://citizens.trouble.city)
+-- Forum: Main Street (http://citizens.trouble.city/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Focused Film Discussion (http://citizens.trouble.city/forumdisplay.php?fid=94)
+--- Thread: INDIANA JONES and you're actually fucking serious pre-release discussion (/showthread.php?tid=155331)



- noirheaven - 01-19-2018

Rumor mill has it that Harrison Ford and Steven Spielberg have both read David Koepp's screenplay. Wish there was more, or anything confirming even this, out there.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Belloq87 View Post
 

A report in Deadline heavily implies this is likely Spielberg's next film.



It also heavily implies that THE KIDNAPPING OF EDGARDO MORTARA is going the way of ROBOPOCALYPSE (i.e. it's probably not happening).  That's really disappointing if true.


Eh, while it's very possible-to-likely that Mortara is a dead duck (which is a shame), I'm not putting too much stock into that Deadline article by Mike Fleming, Jr. I have a hard time fully believing an article that gets so many simple facts wrong, like saying that Mortara faded for Spielberg when he chose Ready Player One instead. Uhh, no, Mike Fleming, Jr.: RPO was already deep in postproduction; it was The Post that caught The Beard's eye last February as he was struggling to find an age-appropriate child actor for the lead part in Mortara).



The article also says that Spielberg might make something else altogether this year, as he has a year before he has to focus on "Indy 5." Haha. Essentially, it's a puff piece article that tells us little, but I appreciate its speculative approach, I guess.



I hope Spielberg makes *something* else this year, as "Indy 5" can wait. Whether that's "Mortara" (the Deadline article does not convince me that it's joining the fate of "Robopocalypse," but with the inability to find a kid for the part I can certainly believe it's perhaps on the backburner for now) or "West Side Story" or something else that catches his eye (make a murder mystery! or a Western! or a straight-up horror film! haha), I hope so.



Although the rumor from Harrison Ford is that Ford wants to shoot "Indy" this year. So... Maybe that will be next?




- carnotaur3 - 01-19-2018

Quote:

Originally Posted by NoirHeaven View Post


I hope Spielberg makes *something* else this year, as "Indy 5" can wait.



How long has Ford been knocking on death's door since 2008? How many plane crashes and Falcon door mishaps are you willing to put him through?!




- Overlord - 01-19-2018

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carnotaur3 View Post
 


How long has Ford been knocking on death's door since 2008? How many plane crashes and Falcon door mishaps are you willing to put him through?!



Ford is going to kill someone.



His near miss within five miles of my house was taken WAY too lightly by the powers that be, probably due to his name recognition.




- atomtastic - 01-19-2018




- fatherdude - 01-19-2018

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoirHeaven View Post


I hope Spielberg makes *something* else this year, as "Indy 5" can wait.



If he's going to make it, then it's the one project that can't wait.  Ford needs to be in front of the camera yesterday.




- carnotaur3 - 01-19-2018

Quote:

Originally Posted by FatherDude View Post
 


If he's going to make it, then it's the one project that can't wait.  Ford needs to be in front of the camera yesterday.



Indiana Jones and the Search for a Time Machine




- ravi - 01-19-2018

If they make Indy 5, they'd likely have to set it in the late 60's or early 70's and for me, setting an Indy film in that period just feels...wrong.




- Overlord - 01-19-2018

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ravi View Post
 

If they make Indy 5, they'd likely have to set it in the late 60's or early 70's and for me, setting an Indy film in that period just feels...wrong.



I would guess they set it in 1959 and do some quiet CGI de-aging work.




- arjen rudd - 01-19-2018

AAnd some Pratt talk now. Sounds like a Godfather 2 deal. Or whatever that shit-ass new Die Hard is supposed to be.


- Overlord - 01-19-2018

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arjen Rudd View Post

And some Pratt talk now. Sounds like a Godfather 2 deal. Or whatever that shit-ass new Die Hard is supposed to be.


If they're going to reboot, just reboot.  Don't try to convince me that Pratt and Harrison Ford are the same person in the same Indy-verse.




- superlaser - 01-19-2018

A[quote name="Overlord" url="/community/t/155331/indiana-jones-and-youre-actually-fucking-serious-pre-release-discussion/2000_50#post_4454362"]
If they're going to reboot, just reboot.  Don't try to convince me that Pratt and Harrison Ford are the same person in the same Indy-verse.
[/quote]
I hear Alden Ehrenreich is available.


- fatherdude - 01-19-2018

Ugh, we don't need to be digitally airbrushing faces in an Indiana Jones movie.  Wasn't there enough digital bullshit in the last one?  If Indy has to look old as fuck so be it.  Mortality is far less ugly than Kaminski's gauzy filters.



THE FORCE AWAKENS looked pretty filmic and un-processed to me.  How hard is it to fucking do that?



FUCK




- Dent6084 - 01-19-2018

Ugh. Pratt's not remotely surly enough to replicate classic-era Ford.




- Belloq87 - 01-19-2018

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dent6084 View Post
 

Ugh. Pratt's not remotely surly enough to replicate classic-era Ford.


I also don't see him being credibly intellectual, either.  Nothing I've seen from Pratt (who I generally like) has thus far convinced me that I could buy him as a university professor, highly respected in his field and conversant in all manner of ancient lore and mythology.  Pratt's overall vibe is way too flippant for that.




- fatherdude - 01-19-2018

My feeling about THE GODFATHER II approach is this: it could definitely work, but why make Ford share significant screentime with his replacement in what is ostensibly his last outing as Indy?  The reboot is going to happen anyway.  Let the new actor wait his turn instead of giving us 50% of a fifth Indiana Jones movie.




- superlaser - 01-19-2018

ASo if they successfully recast/reboot Indy, what then? Is Spielberg stuck directing a new Indy every 2-3 years to feed the machine? Because if not, then we’re staring down the barrel of a non-Spielberg Indy film and does anyone really want that?


- user_32 - 01-19-2018

Harrison Ford still looks the same he did in the fourth so why are we talking about de-aging? Let him age. Who the fuck cares? Indy is all about battle damage. Harrison Ford's age is the least of the film's problems. With a great script, this could be great.



Recasting is such a dumb idea for Indiana Jones, it would be like making a young Han Solo movie with some new actor.




- fatherdude - 01-19-2018

Quote:
Originally Posted by superlaser View Post

So if they successfully recast/reboot Indy, what then? Is Spielberg stuck directing a new Indy every 2-3 years to feed the machine? Because if not, then we’re staring down the barrel of a non-Spielberg Indy film and does anyone really want that?


Spielberg is done when Ford is, I'd bet on it.  I think the only reason he's doing this one is because he feels an obligation to give the series a proper sendoff.




- superlaser - 01-19-2018

A[quote name="FatherDude" url="/community/t/155331/indiana-jones-and-youre-actually-fucking-serious-pre-release-discussion/2000_50#post_4454388"]
Spielberg is done when Ford is, I'd bet on it.  I think the only reason he's doing this one is because he feels an obligation to give the series a proper sendoff.
[/quote]
If they’re going to retire the series after this one anyway, why bother with finding a younger Indy? Just do a grump old man Indy movie.

If the actor recast is successful, beware JJ Abrams’ Indiana Jones and the Mystery Box of Destiny, coming soon to a theater near you.


- Overlord - 01-19-2018

A[quote name="superlaser" url="/community/t/155331/indiana-jones-and-youre-actually-fucking-serious-pre-release-discussion/2010#post_4454395"]
If they’re going to retire the series after this one anyway, why bother with finding a younger Indy? Just do a grump old man Indy movie.[/quote]

Cause it's a valuable IP and they want to keep the door open to not retiring it?


- fatherdude - 01-19-2018

Quote:
Originally Posted by superlaser View Post

If they’re going to retire the series after this one anyway, why bother with finding a younger Indy? Just do a grump old man Indy movie.


I think the assumption is that just because Spielberg and Ford will be done with it doesn't mean Bob Iger will.  But yeah, I agree.




- bradito - 01-19-2018

AMaybe they'll do another flashback opening with a younger Indiana Jones, where he gets into shenanigans and it explains the origin of how he got his satchel or some shit.


- superlaser - 01-19-2018

A[quote name="Overlord" url="/community/t/155331/indiana-jones-and-youre-actually-fucking-serious-pre-release-discussion/2000_50#post_4454399"]
Cause it's a valuable IP and they want to keep the door open to not retiring it?[/quote]


[quote name="FatherDude" url="/community/t/155331/indiana-jones-and-youre-actually-fucking-serious-pre-release-discussion/2000_50#post_4454400"]
I think the assumption is that just because Spielberg and Ford will be done with it doesn't mean Bob Iger will.  But yeah, I agree.
[/quote]
Which was my original point. Everybody’s so concerned with recasting Indy, and I’m more worried about replacing Spielberg. I’m a little surprised there’s not more handwringing over that yet.

I’m also worried that the idea of a Spielberg-less Indy will make me go full commodorejohn-in-a-Star Wars-thread crazy.


- arjen rudd - 01-19-2018

ANaw, you make him Bond! Should have happened twenty years ago. You’ll have more bad Indy movies, but more good ones too.


- Overlord - 01-19-2018

AReplacing Spielberg?

Yeah ... That hasn't been a concern of mine in a long time, particularly after "Indy IV: Spielberg is now a company rather than a director."


- commodorejohn - 01-19-2018

A[quote name="superlaser" url="/community/t/155331/indiana-jones-and-youre-actually-fucking-serious-pre-release-discussion/2000#post_4454404"]I’m also worried that the idea of a Spielberg-less Indy will make me go full commodorejohn-in-a-Star Wars-thread crazy.[/quote]
This sentence warms my black, shriveled heart.


- history buff - 01-20-2018

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arjen Rudd View Post

Naw, you make him Bond! Should have happened twenty years ago. You’ll have more bad Indy movies, but more good ones too.


I've been saying this forever. I know there are so many who think that recasting Indiana Jones with another actor is cinematic blasphemy but why the hell not. Ford will always be Indy to most everyone, but people said the same thing about Connery's Bond back in the 1960s. Not many could have imagined that anyone other that Connery could be Bond, much less that the series would continue and proper into the 21st century, yet it has.



I could see the Indy franchise go down a similar road. It just needs to be the right actor, script, and director. I know that's a lot to ask, but it's not out of the realm of possibility. One of my many gripes with the Crystal Skull was, even though I get why they did it, was setting the film in the 50s. An aging Indy during the Cold War facing off against Commies isn't nearly as compelling as Indy going against Nazis. A younger actor facing off against Nazis, especially in today's political climate, is a sure winner.




- user_32 - 01-20-2018

ABond’s beginnings came from a book series. Indiana Jones was always Harrison Ford. Besides, Bond replaced its actor less than a decade in. It’s a little harder to accept after three decades.

I’m sure Disney will be watching how well people accept a new actor as Han Solo first.


- noirheaven - 01-20-2018

Quote:

Originally Posted by superlaser View Post

So if they successfully recast/reboot Indy, what then? Is Spielberg stuck directing a new Indy every 2-3 years to feed the machine? Because if not, then we’re staring down the barrel of a non-Spielberg Indy film and does anyone really want that?

Spielberg will say goodbye to this franchise when Ford does, which will be with the next film. I think that Disney will, out of a sense of respect to both men, give the franchise a little rest (maybe even four/five years?) before launching the inevitable reboot. And Spielberg will wisely allow Disney to pick who they want to direct those.



Spielberg's 71 now. Getting him to make any huge commercial blockbuster these days is almost like pulling teeth from someone with no anesthesia. He kept hemming and hawing about Ready Player One until Warner Bros. gave him a huge pitch that he was the only director who could do it right, apparently, and his grown-up kids insisted he make it, too. Whereas he will drop everything else on his plate to make a Bridge of Spies or a Post.



As others have said, I think the chief reasons he is going to make this one are (a) he wants to give Indiana Jones a good, memorable sendoff and (b) he wants to work with his friend Harrison Ford one more time. And that's pretty much it. I think he wants to make it the best Indy movie he can because he knows how so many fans reacted to Crystal Skull.



As for Indy 5, what are five or six things people want to see from it?



I'll go first:



1. If there is any doubt about the necessity of supporting/side characters, don't have them. This doesn't get talked about enough as far as Crystal Skull's actual failings go, but there pretty much everybody in that movie who isn't named Indiana Jones or Spalko or even Mutt (who, I know, is no one's favorite) is a big, fat waste. Mutt is a troubled character but at least he's important in terms of propelling the plot. Mac is a wishy-washy waste who should have been killed off about 20-30 minutes in. Oxley and Marion... They all just detract from Indy. If this is the last Spielberg-Ford Indy, it needs to focus on Indy. You can almost see Ford disengage from the story/film as the picture wears on and it gets cluttered with too many supporting characters. We need a villain, yes, and probably a sub-villain and an unreliable ally, etc. But don't just have characters around to have characters around. Indy becomes so unimportant as that film goes on, and that's one of its great failings.



2. Don't overdo the time period the way Crystal Skull does. By which I mean, the movie insisted that we were in the late 1950s every minute or two. Peppering the movie with that here and there is fine. Oversaturation of that idea leads to it becoming leaden.



3. Give Indy a strong character arc again. I think the idea with Crystal Skull was that his relationship with his estranged son would lead to an emotional payoff. It didn't, largely because the screenplay was a Frankenstein's monster of a mess after too many revisions. There are seeds to something special in the first half hour or so, as he looks melancholically at pictures of his dad and Marcus Brody (I think?). Just never gets there in the end.



4. More grounded action sequences. Fairly self-explanatory but the jungle chase scene that serves as the climax of Crystal Skull is really tedious and uninteresting. An Indiana Jones action setpiece should never conjure such words.



5. A very strong villain, played to the hilt by a fine thespian. Obviously physical attributes will play a big role in whoever is cast as the final Ford-Spielberg-era Indiana Jones villain, but I'm hoping they knock this one out of the park. Truth be told, Cate Blanchett is one of Crystal Skull's better ingredients, not surprisingly, but she kind of gets hung out to dry in the film's doughy latter half. But she's good! I like her. Some Indy villains are better than others. Going out with one who can rival Belloq and Mola Ram, etc., gives Spielberg and Ford the chance to possibly outdo the previous "conclusive chapter" to the series in Last Crusade, which was always weakened a bit by its fairly pedestrian/okayish big bad.I don't know why but I keep seeing an English villain, perhaps because I loved the idea presented in this thread over Indy stumbling across a Hammer Film-type English countryside cult/Satanist group or something, so at the moment I'm warming up to the idea of, say, Damian Lewis as the villain. Or, as others and I have said, maybe an ex-James Bond. Pierce Brosnan as the villain? I'm sure he'd bring the goods. Of course maybe Ryan Gosling will get his wish and play a big role in the movie haha.



6. A great John Williams score.




- Richard Dickson - 01-20-2018

AYou could do Indy in the late '60s. There was a pretty decent occult boom during that time, what with Chariots of the Gods and Bermuda Triangle mania and all the New Age hippie stuff coming into prominence. Or go the opposite: the mystical world is fading away along with Indy, which is why we're not seeing more Arks or Grails or Sankara Stones.


- bartleby_scriven - 01-20-2018

ATie it into the space race, I’m telling you. Have the MacGuffin be a moon rock that crashed on earth years ago, something like that.


- noirheaven - 01-20-2018

I like either of/both of those ideas!




- virtanen - 01-20-2018

If you could put something in Spielberg's coffee to have him make INDY 5 a spiritual (and tasteless) sequel to THE POST.





Huey armada looms above the jungle. Below frightened villagers flee from the upcoming destruction.



VO: "The Bible speaks of the Ark leveling mountains and laying waste to entire regions. An army which carries the Ark before it... is invincible."



In the middle of the villagers stands an old hippie-looking man who's wearing a fedora. He looks at the Hueys, unafraid.



VO: "Indiana, we are simply passing through history. This, this *is* history."



The Hueys descend closer. Their weapons are armed.



The old man raises his hand. He gives the Hueys the finger.



CUT TO: INDIANA JONES AND THE SMELL OF NAPALM - Christmas Day, 2020 -




- fatherdude - 01-20-2018

Haunted.  Castle.






- arjen rudd - 01-20-2018

A[quote name="User_32" url="/community/t/155331/indiana-jones-and-youre-actually-fucking-serious-pre-release-discussion/2000#post_4454565"]Bond’s beginnings came from a book series. Indiana Jones was always Harrison Ford. Besides, Bond replaced its actor less than a decade in. It’s a little harder to accept after three decades.
[/quote]

Thing is, it’s probably going to happen anyway. Like, this new one would have to bomb huge for it not to happen. And even then, it probably would happen ten years down the line. And I find it hard to believe they’d bungle the transition as hard as Bond did, with Lazenby for the one film. I think it’s actually much tougher to swap the role out ten years in, at the height of its popularity. At this point, how many millennials are going to give a shit if Ford gets replaced? One good movie with a new Indy and he’s the new Indy.

Plus, audiences are conditioned for actor turnover now. We’ve had like half a dozen Batmans.