Indy 5 on the way?

[Deak Starkiller]

A true fanboy would defend the film blindly and refuse to see its issues. I don't. Time and again I've said that the movie falls apart after it moves to Peru. There is a lot of head-scratching and unfortunate stuff in there. I just don't think it's a total disaster or one of the worst films ever. And the fridge scene is great (except for the #*@! prairie dogs).

I am just busting your balls, I think we're on the same page.

 

[Khev]

I still think people hold THE LAST CRUSADE in too high esteem. IMHO, it's just about as flawed and clunky as KOTCS in many respects. But it does have the Connery/Ford dynamic and nostalgia going for it, though.

RAIDERS will never be touched. It's a perfect Action-Adventure film on every level. TEMPLE OF DOOM doesn't have that pedigree, but it stands as probably the most "honest" film in the series in that it's unashamedly the most pulpy and most like an actual 20's-30's pulp adventure serial, complete with over-the-top villain and annoying damsel in distress.

All that said, I'd still take a weak INDY film over 99% of the stuff Hollywood churns out these days. But I would never accept an INDY film without Ford as the character.

That's a big reason I'm leaning toward wanting no more films. At worst the Indy series is a 50/50 split between good/great and not so good. I'd hate the balance to tip in favor of the negative.

 

[Mad Old Lu]

I still think people hold THE LAST CRUSADE in too high esteem. IMHO, it's just about as flawed and clunky as KOTCS in many respects. But it does have the Connery/Ford dynamic and nostalgia going for it, though.

RAIDERS will never be touched. It's a perfect Action-Adventure film on every level. TEMPLE OF DOOM doesn't have that pedigree, but it stands as probably the most "honest" film in the series in that it's unashamedly the most pulpy and most like an actual 20's-30's pulp adventure serial, complete with over-the-top villain and annoying damsel in distress.

All that said, I'd still take a weak INDY film over 99% of the stuff Hollywood churns out these days. But I would never accept an INDY film without Ford as the character.

Also agree. I was MORE disappointed when LC came out because I was expecting a movie on the level of TOD and Raiders. With KotCS, I had already come to terms with Raiders being the anomaly in that it is movie perfection, TOD pretty good but not as good as Raiders, and that LC was a big ol goofy adventure. Another big goofy adventure is what we got with KotCS, and in some ways I even prefer it to LC because of its superior effects. LCs effects were abyssmal for 1989 and for it being a high profile property.

I actually had a passing thought a while ago about where to take the Indy franchise. I had long been thinking of the plot of a possible 4th movie (in mine I involved Short Round and Indy's son, and the Terracotta army before the Lara Croft movie came out).

But I also thought that maybe there could be a sequel to Raiders that did not involve Indy. It would be set another 500 years in the future, after some kind of apocalypse, but well after the world had recovered. It would be like technology reset itself, so the tech would be more akin to the 1930s with some steampunk/anachronistic type stuff. A new archaeologist would set out on a quest for the Ark, and would note that the trail went cold around 1936 when Hitler was known to go after it and the US government intervened. Some of the "ruins" they would visit would be buildings we recognize that are around today.

I also thought about a modern day Indy, but then the crappy National Treasure came out.

 

[JAWS]

I still think people hold THE LAST CRUSADE in too high esteem. IMHO, it's just about as flawed and clunky as KOTCS in many respects. But it does have the Connery/Ford dynamic and nostalgia going for it, though.

RAIDERS will never be touched. It's a perfect Action-Adventure film on every level. TEMPLE OF DOOM doesn't have that pedigree, but it stands as probably the most "honest" film in the series in that it's unashamedly the most pulpy and most like an actual 20's-30's pulp adventure serial, complete with over-the-top villain and annoying damsel in distress.

All that said, I'd still take a weak INDY film over 99% of the stuff Hollywood churns out these days. But I would never accept an INDY film without Ford as the character.

I have always thought that TLC was Way overrated. Never understood how people like it better the TOD. Connery was great but the action scenes were average......Well except for the tank scene.

TLC is an Oscar winner compared to KOTCS though.

 

[SkyIScrape]

Also agree. I was MORE disappointed when LC came out because I was expecting a movie on the level of TOD and Raiders. With KotCS, I had already come to terms with Raiders being the anomaly in that it is movie perfection, TOD pretty good but not as good as Raiders, and that LC was a big ol goofy adventure. Another big goofy adventure is what we got with KotCS, and in some ways I even prefer it to LC because of its superior effects. LCs effects were abyssmal for 1989 and for it being a high profile property.

I actually had a passing thought a while ago about where to take the Indy franchise. I had long been thinking of the plot of a possible 4th movie (in mine I involved Short Round and Indy's son, and the Terracotta army before the Lara Croft movie came out).

But I also thought that maybe there could be a sequel to Raiders that did not involve Indy. It would be set another 500 years in the future, after some kind of apocalypse, but well after the world had recovered. It would be like technology reset itself, so the tech would be more akin to the 1930s with some steampunk/anachronistic type stuff. A new archaeologist would set out on a quest for the Ark, and would note that the trail went cold around 1936 when Hitler was known to go after it and the US government intervened. Some of the "ruins" they would visit would be buildings we recognize that are around today.

I also thought about a modern day Indy, but then the crappy National Treasure came out.

I'm wondering if motion capture and "de-aging" technology has advanced enough to make a realistic feature-length Indy film with half old Indy and half young Indy. I always wanted a film where something Indy did in his past affected the present, and the film jumps back and forth, however it would likely have to include some element of time travel or at least events in the present effecting those in the past perhaps. I'm sure it wouldn't fit with the story-telling style of the other films, but it could be a great way to close the series, give us a complex story, and let us see a 30-something Harrison Ford one last time. Of course, it could also be a massive disaster.

 

[JAWS]

90% of this post sucked.

There're 22 Bond movies.
____ everybody, Never Say Never Again counts dammit!
So let's factor that in.
Connery did 7 of them.
Craig's didn't suck either.
He did 2.
Take all that into account.
Your math is off.

Diamonds are Forever is one of the worst bond films and Connery was in that one. It was the start of the campy bond films.

The First four Bonds are classic. You Only Live Twice was pretty good. OHMSS is a good one. The Spy Who Loved Me is Moore's best. For Your Eyes Only is a decent film. I always liked The Man with the Golden gun because Christopher Lee is one of Bond's Best villians.

The Less said about the two Dalton movies the Better!!

Goldeneye is one of the best Bond films. Tomorrow Never Dies is fun. The Next two Pierce films were pretty awful.

Casino is Great!!!! QOS not so much but it's OK

I don't count Never Say Never Again because it's a Thunderball remake and not a very good one.

So thats 12 good Bond films. Way over the 10% are good.

MATH WAS WAY OFF

 

[thenammagazine]

Spoken like a true fanboy Carl. But I agree to some extent, I feel as if (here comes my fanboy comment) KOTCS can be repaired with editing and slight, and I do mean slight F/X work. There is a solid movie there, it just needs a few minutes trimmed, gophers removed, 2 waterfalls deleted, and one or two branches removed from Mutt's nuts. Oh and make the aliens more of a silouhette.

So wait. You call Carl the fanboy, but would keep Mutt's "Tarzan" scene and all of Marion's Cheshire cat BS?

Though I agree with a lot of that. Like Khev said in the beginning, if they'd showed Indy climbing into the fridge and cut everything out between that and when it opens, we would've bought it. Though I would also like them to cut out all of Ray Winstone's scenes. His "Jonesy" and the double, triple, quadrupedal cross, made Indy look like a trusting putz and not the super Archeologist/tough guy/WWII hero he was supposed to be. I think a more solid movie could be made with some clever editing.

 

[hairlesswookiee]

They should just go all in and make a crossover movie with Rick O'Connell from The Mummy series.

 

[thenammagazine]

They should just go all in and make a crossover movie with Rick O'Connell from The Mummy series.

Only if Indy gets to kill Rick.

 

[Deak Starkiller]

So wait. You call Carl the fanboy, but would keep Mutt's "Tarzan" scene and all of Marion's Cheshire cat BS?

Though I agree with a lot of that. Like Khev said in the beginning, if they'd showed Indy climbing into the fridge and cut everything out between that and when it opens, we would've bought it. Though I would also like them to cut out all of Ray Winstone's scenes. His "Jonesy" and the double, triple, quadrupedal cross, made Indy look like a trusting putz and not the super Archeologist/tough guy/WWII hero he was supposed to be. I think a more solid movie could be made with some clever editing.

Oh don't get me wrong NAM, I am including myself in the Indy fanboy category. I think it's safe to say anyone is a fanboy if they love these movies (trilogy ) to the point of thinking about editing them.

They should just go all in and make a crossover movie with Rick O'Connell from The Mummy series.

De-Friended. The Mummy suxxx.

 

[dano669]

Diamonds are Forever is one of the worst bond films and Connery was in that one. It was the start of the campy bond films.

The First four Bonds are classic. You Only Live Twice was pretty good. OHMSS is a good one. The Spy Who Loved Me is Moore's best. For Your Eyes Only is a decent film. I always liked The Man with the Golden gun because Christopher Lee is one of Bond's Best villians.

The Less said about the two Dalton movies the Better!!

Goldeneye is one of the best Bond films. Tomorrow Never Dies is fun. The Next two Pierce films were pretty awful.

Casino is Great!!!! QOS not so much but it's OK

I don't count Never Say Never Again because it's a Thunderball remake and not a very good one.

So thats 12 good Bond films. Way over the 10% are good.

MATH WAS WAY OFF

Why the focus on what I said about bond. This is an Indy thread.

 

[JAWS]

Why the focus on what I said about bond. This is an Indy thread.

Cause you brought it up, it was FUN and there is no Bond section .

 

[dano669]

Fair enough. The only reason I mentioned bond was because someone in an earlier post said the Indy films should be like the bonds.
Having multiple people take on the role of Indy.
Which I think is a terrible idea.
Don't get me wrong I'd love to see Indy done for as long as possible but only if they do it right and I don't think they will

 

[thenammagazine]

Fair enough. The only reason I mentioned bond was because someone in an earlier post said the Indy films should be like the bonds.
Having multiple people take on the role of Indy.
Which I think is a terrible idea.
Don't get me wrong I'd love to see Indy done for as long as possible but only if they do it right and I don't think they will

Most of us agree with this consensus, but not your Bond hating.

 

[RyanSD]

If they do a 5th film, I'd prefer it to stand alone, much like TOD did, and have no references to previous films. Just a stand alone adventure film with Indy.

I felt one of the faults of KOTCS was too many characters and too many references to previous films. I thought it was going good right up until Mutt shows up. Marion and John Hurt were just overkill at that point. It almost felt like they tried to copy Connery and Denholm Elliot characters with Broadbent and Hurt. But that's just one criticism.

I'd like to see them do one more, but I don't think it would be any better. Ford and Spielberg are well past their prime and haven't made anything decent in a long time (though Cowboys & Aliens looks good.) Lucas is a lost cause at this point. He hasn't made a good decision since he hired Kershner to direct Empire.

 

[dano669]

Most of us agree with this consensus, but not your Bond hating.

It's not that I hate bond. Early stuff = classic.
That's the last I will talk about bond

As for Indy 5 and on bad idea.

It should have been done while ford was a bit younger. I think they've left them too late

 

[Deckard]

There is no Indy 4. There should never be an Indy 5. The last Indiana Jones was made in 1989 when he rode off into the sunset.

He is not married, Sean Connery is not dead, and Shia is just a fleeting gay sexual desire of George Lucas. It should be that way forever.

 

[dano669]

There is no Indy 4. There should never be an Indy 5. The last Indiana Jones was made in 1989 when he rode off into the sunset.

He is not married, Sean Connery is not dead, and Shia is just a fleeting gay sexual desire of George Lucas. It should be that way forever.

Amen brother

 

[thenammagazine]

There is no Indy 4. There should never be an Indy 5. The last Indiana Jones was made in 1989 when he rode off into the sunset.

He is not married, Sean Connery is not dead, and Shia is just a fleeting gay sexual desire of George Lucas. It should be that way forever.

 

[Kabukiman]

The Less said about the two Dalton movies the Better!!

If you like Craig's Bond, you shouldn't be so quick to dismiss Dalton. Watch "The Living Daylights" and I think you might be surprised to find you enjoy it.