• Welcome to The Fedora Lounge!

Indiana Jones V

Discussion in 'The Moving Picture' started by Tiki Tom, Feb 26, 2016.

  1. Tiki Tom

    Tiki Tom Practically Family

    We will just have to see. If Disney is truly thinking about turning Indiana Jones into an "expanded franchise universe", it might be interesting and good. I'm imagining a whole new 1930s universe in which we are introduced to a gang of romantic rough-hewn characters, some of whom we've already met (the tramp steamer captain, Indy's seaplane flying pal, the hard drinking beautiful saloon keeper, etc.) all fighting in a loosely coordinated effort dedicated to undermining the Nazis. Of course, there would have to be something tying them together and presumably that would be their relationship to Dr. Jones. But he wouldn't necessarily have to make a cameo appearance in each film. As long as Disney stays true to the 1930s mythology/style/conventions and some of the Indiana Jones iconography, I'd be on board for the ride.
    So I'm not yet writing off the whole enterprise. Although ---as of today--- I've seen nothing additional to confirm that Disney is really working on an "expanded franchise universe" concept.
    David Conwill likes this.
  2. And at some point they all run into the Howling Commandos and fight Nazis together? :D
  3. Mae

    Mae Call Me a Cab

    I understood that reference.
  4. PeterGunnLives

    PeterGunnLives One of the Regulars

    They should have cast the guy who played the younger version of Harrison Ford's character in "Age of Adeline." He definitely had the look and the mannerisms. And the same guy should also play young Han Solo, and young Jack Ryan... in fact, he should build his whole career on playing younger versions of characters previously played by Harrison Ford. ;)

  5. Disne doesn't do anything in which they don't smell moolah. I'd say that f the guy they hire to play the Young Han Solo in the forthcoming origins flick is received well as a Ford-substitute, we're very likely to see him trotted out as New Indy. If they have decent stories and he's at least as good a sub as was Karl Urban for Deforrest Kelley, bring it on.... but I'm inclined to be cynical about the Mouse, evne if it did save Star Wars from George Lucas.
    Bushman likes this.
  6. Tiki Tom

    Tiki Tom Practically Family

  7. Mae

    Mae Call Me a Cab

  8. Tiki Tom

    Tiki Tom Practically Family

    Mean while in the so-called "real world" (home of "fake news").... "One of the few remaining unstudied major biblical sites, where according to the Bible the Ark of the Covenant was kept for two decades, will be excavated by archaeologists this summer for the first time."


    I hope Harrison Ford at least visits the dig site. Photo op. Talk about free publicity.
    Frunobulax likes this.
  9. I’m sorry to see Harrison Ford returning. Not because he isn’t wonderful in the role but because it locks the story into a 1970’s timeframe (Ford was born in ’42, Indy in 1899—following that chronology it’s currently 1974 in the Indy universe, though I don’t think they were that rigid with the 1957 date of Crystal Skull).

    The prequel stories set in the 1920’s and ‘30s—starting with Indiana Jones and the Peril at Delphi—were great stories and would make for good films. They just need to find the right actor in his 20s to play the role.

    I would not be opposed to stand-alone or prequel films set in the same universe. You could even have Ford in them as a framing device, made up to look younger.
  10. My vote is "no - just no. Please - no."
    MisterCairo likes this.
  11. I'm in two minds about this. I'd love to see Indy revivied and done well, but imo it will have to be somebody who can do a convincing Ford impression - I just can't see separating out that actor and that character any other way. I do sort of agree with the view that it's better just to leave it alone, but given how much the Mouse paid to buy Lucasfilm, they were never going to do that. Ford as a framing device for a younger actor convincingly playing him younger would be the best option, I think. I can't see them continuing on the story after Crystal Skull - I agree that it's far too 'late' in time for Indy then; also, the ending, taking his hat back from Mutt - 'I'm not dead yet, Junior' was, imo, as good a place to leave it as any - almost better than him riding off on the horse in 1938. Let Ford establish hi replacement via framing in this film, then, if it works, the replacement can take over from there.

    In temrs of the timeline.... I recall reading that Lucas made it a condition of the sale to Disney that none of their Star Wars films crosses over with any of his in the parts of that Universe's timeline in which they fall. I wonder is there something similar in place for Indy? That would leave a lot of scope still, of course, as they only covered 1935-38, and 1957 (not counting the TV show). I would like that - I think the best eay to do it would be to build on with the established character rather than "reimagine" it. If they could do a prequel to Raiders that set it up as well as they did with Rogue One.... then of course there are Indy's War Years (though that would be better again, I think, as a Netflix type series).
  12. I still reckon Anthony Ingruber's the man for the job, Edward. I'm annoyed they didn't pick him to play Han Solo in the anthology movie they're going to make about that character. Ingruber's got the lop-sided grin down pat and everything.
  13. Well, I had to look him up, but I'd say young Mr. Ingruber would be an excellent choice. And it's only 1926 for that Indy.
  14. Tiki Tom

    Tiki Tom Practically Family

    Update: Release pushed back to summer 2020.

    Also: Rumor alert! The article says: "We also know that this is actually going to be Ford playing the role of Indy in a proper manner, not just him playing an older version of the character used in order to flashback to a younger version." I have no idea what exactly this means. Will it be a return to the "proper Indy" of the 1930s? Or does this just mean that we will see Indy chasing treasures in the 1970s?

  15. Hmn. I'm leaning to the view they should just park it unless they can find a younger man who can do a crebile impression of Ford. They can't credibly make a version with him playing younger (the CGI / digital stuff isn't quite there - see Rogue One - though it will, I'm sure get there eventually), and to my mind it would be silly to carry Indy on into the later fifties / into the Sixties. He's a pre-Kennedy, pre-Beatles creature. So the only thing to do is end it, or find someone else. And I highly doubt The Mouse spent that kind of money acquiring the porperty not to make more....
  16. I think we've discussed this before (or maybe it was a similar discussion on another forum), but I'd rather they cast an actor who can capture the essence of Indy rather than someone who would simply be doing an impression of Ford; to me, that would be nothing more than an extended Saturday Night Live skit. For better or worse, I'm interested in seeing what they come up with.

    I did think the wording of the last sentence in that article was interesting: "...Steven Spielberg has promised not to kill Harrison Ford in the movie." Okay, so Ford is safe, but what about Indy? :p
    Edward likes this.
  17. Tiki Tom

    Tiki Tom Practically Family

    So many good Indiana Jones plots out there...


    But not one written for a 70+ year old Indiana Jones. Steven Spielberg is in a bit of a jam. Placing Indy in the 1970s sort of kills everything that made the series so compelling. But setting the story in the 1930s or 40s (as it should be), pretty much rules out the use of Harrison Ford. Unless some sort of hopelessly contrived time travel device is used (or a "flashback"), this conundrum is irreconcilable.

    Dare I suggest that the project should be abandoned/postponed until a unified theory for the new "expanded franchise universe" is convincingly nailed down. I imagine that, somewhere in Hollywood, there is a whole team of overpaid writers who are wrestling with exactly this dilemma. ("...And then Harrison Ford gets beamed up to the Enterprise where he is taken to the Holideck and into a perfectly recreated 1930s world so that he can stop the Borg from joining forces with the Nazis...")
    Last edited: Jun 7, 2017
    Mae likes this.
  18. Well, I know what you mean, but I have to admit I'll be very surprised if they go the route of reimagining. Hopefully, though, they'll have learned something from Lucas' mistakes with the Star Wars prequels. Certainly, Disney have turned in two pretty credible SW pictures (Rogue One being the superior piece by far), so I suppose we'll see what they do with it.

    Here's something I don't think we've discussed so far: Lucas wrote a binding clause into the contract that bans Disney from overlapping any of their Star Wars bits with the timeline in his six films (presumably to stop them overwriting any of his canon, in particular the prequels about which he has been extremely defensive in the past). I wonder is there any such condition applied to the Jones properties?

    I do struggle to imagine a successful EU for Jones, given that whereas Star Wars was always an ensemble piece with an epic-level mythology behind it, Indy was always a character-led piece. I can't see them being able to pull off an Indy-Villains-without-Indy flick in the mould of Suicide Squad, for instance.
  19. Crystal Skull was set in 1957 and it's barely nine years old. Not that it would be that much better, but they could easily set this one in the mid- to late-1960s and not many would notice Ford has aged 12 years (assuming they stick to the 2020 release date). But if they did that, my concern would be that they wouldn't be able to resist including the war in Vietnam, the counter culture, the race to the moon, or any number of "hot button" issues from the late-60s in the story somehow.

Share This Page