Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny

Falthyron

Indiana Jones 5 has just been announced by Disney and it is coming in summer 2019.

http://www.slashfilm.com/indiana-jones-5/

Spielberg and Ford are back on, as are Marshall and Kennedy, but no sign of George Lucas(thankfully!) or Shia LaBeouf(yet!).

Ford will be 77 in 2019... Who cares though, right? It's Indy! And they will have to make up for Crystal Skull. Raiders, Temple, Crusade, Skull, 5. The pattern suggests 5 will be a great film! :pac:

Early theory: Ford's son disappears and he has to go looking for him. Some what mirroring Crusade, but makes sure the son has minimal screen time. Either that, or they kill off LaBeouf at the start.

kronsington

I find this news to be a bit embarrassing. does anyone really want a 5th movie? did anyone want a 4th film? and look how that turned out. I bet this was part of Ford's deal to appear in Episode 7. Reeks of an ego trip by Ford ( who will be 76 when this comes out). This is a franchise that could be rebooted in the right hands and leave the originals in tact with some dignity.

SimonTemplar

It could work with a good story. Just keep Lucas as far away from the project as possible.

OU812

Hopefully they'll bring Chris Pratt in as his son & the plot will be the son going looking for Indy, thereby minimising Ford's screen time & rebooting the series...

Indy IV was set in 1954/55? Making him 55/56 (he was born in 1899 according to the wiki). Unless they're gonna digitally de-age him, he can get away with 60-65 tops, they have to set this one around 1960.

1961 was the Bay of Pigs...
1962 the space race was in full effect (John Glenn went to Space)...
1963 JFK's Assassination...

Hmmm.....

SimonTemplar

It doesn't have to be set against the backdrop of a real life event from the 1960s. In fact, I hope they don't do that.

Sad Professor

No mention of a script or a writer or anything except the involvement of the three principles. I may be wrong but this me leads to believe that this is just Disney announcing the start of a development and booking that release date in case they need it. If so, 2019 is very optimistic because I'm not sure Spielberg really wants to make another Indy. He probably likes the idea of making up for the last one, but mostly I think he'd like to keep anyone else's mitts off the franchise while he's alive. And Disney won't be able to bully him like they did Abrams, so if he wants to take an extra few years to work on the script while he makes other films, Disney won't be able to do anything about it.

Even if this happens, it'll have to involve some passing of the baton to satisfy Disney who presumedly have plans for Indy and Indy spin-off films for the next few decades. Will Spielberg go for that?

OU812

I'll just leave this here...

Falthyron

OU812 wrote: »

I'll just leave this here...

Chris Pratt is a clown. Chris Pratt is incapable of playing a character who can pull off being an academic first, swashbuckler second. Indy lives and dies with Harrison Ford, imo.

If this is Harrison Ford's final movie before retirement, it would be a fitting an emotional end to his career.

OU812

They could do this...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QG_-Q6rSjug

Arghus

It does feel like a very provisional announcement. They say those names are going to be involved, but Summer 2019 is a long, long way away and a lot can happen before then. I seem to recall that they made a bit of a deal of it at the time that Harrison Ford was up for doing his own stunts back in 2008, hmm...well with the potential passing of more than a decade I personally can't see him doing much more beyond the the occasional bending over to tie his shoelaces; I just can't see him being a dynamic man of action anymore, even to the limited extent that he was in Crystal Skull.

It could possibly provide them with an opportunity to do something new with the character - passing of the torch/ wise elder passing down the know-how, or making it a story of Indy using his wits, rather than brawn to help defeat some force of evil - but it could also be problematic. Indiana Jones is a character partly defined by his physicality, when you remove that you get something a bit off - something that just doesn't feel like we're watching a true representation of the character; which is part of the reason why Crystal Skull just felt so unsatisfying and more like a pastiche than a proper legit addition to the canon. But what can you do? For most people, myself included, Harrison Ford is Indiana Jones. Hell, in my mind he's even more Indiana Jones than he is Harrison Ford, if you know what I mean. As long as he's still walking around making movies, it's very hard to picture someone else in the role.

Maybe, though, I need to ask myself what do I, as a fan, want? Do I want something that's loyal to the actor and the character he's created? Even if that means it could end up being really really lame and chock full of fan service? Or maybe it's better to just reboot the whole damn thing all together and start, relatively, afresh? Reluctantly, I'd probably choose the latter of the two options. I love the Indiana Jones films, they're my favorite film series. And part of the reason, for sure, that I love them is down to Harrison Ford. But a lot of my love comes from their excitement, humor and great action sequences: they're magical films, I'd like to experience their world again. I feel that if Harrison Ford is central to proceedings it might be great in one way, but could really make the film suffer as a whole: it'll be hard to give us a white knuckling crowd pleaser if your leading man is close to eighty. So, yeah, I do think a partial or even total reboot could be done in a way that'll please people. Will they do it that way? God only knows and only time will tell. But who could hypothetically play Indiana Jones?

Well there seems to be only one potential name in the running: Chris Pratt. I'm not sure about Chris Pratt. He's enormously likable, has charisma, is good-looking and can handle action. So far, so good. And when I see pictures of him in the fedora, I cant deny it - it seems to make some sort of sense. But yet, I can't shake the idea that he's not the right man for the role. He's too funny, he's a comedic actor. I am never, ever going to be able to buy him as a Professor of Archaeology. Part of the reason why Ford was so charming as Indiana Jones was that you could easily picture a separate universe where he never went on any madcap adventures at all, and spent all his days as a put-upon academic. With all the will in the world, I can't say that I can see that quality in Chris Pratt. I couldn't even be fully convinced of him as a man of knowledge in the cheesy monstrosity that was Jurassic World: Look at the grin on his face in the scene where he's trying to contain and train the raptors, even he's not buying it. Imagine him fighting Nazis...

cowboyBuilder

sky88

I think they all know that kingdom of crystal skull was an error and are trying to end indy on a good movie that will make everyone happy.

2smiggy

razorblunt

Is this their form of apology for the Crystal Skull?
I'll need more than this, free popcorn and chocolate might do it.

py2006

If it was filmed now and realeased this year I could see Ford pulling it off as he still looks good. But in your 70s things can go drastically down hill in 3 years.

Seems a long time away for a guy of his age.

py2006

Also, I hope they take a leaf outta the Force Awakens book by going retero, non digital cameras and NO cgi insects etc.

Sad Professor

py2006 wrote: »

Also, I hope they take a leaf outta the Force Awakens book by going retero, non digital cameras and NO cgi insects etc.

Well Spielberg hates digital, but I don't think there's any avoiding the CGI. Force Awakens actually has more CG than the prequels just used well.

Duggy747

Shouldn't be surprising, Spielberg has mentioned plenty of times how he regrets what happened with the 4th film and had always planned on doing a 5th. Even Ford has mentioned a 5th film with Spielberg in the past few years.

Mr Freeze

Wasn't this sold to Disney along with Star Wars, so I am assuming that Lucas can't come near this now?

No idea how they can do a 5th after that awful 4th movie and introducing that rubbish son.

He has to be written out or get a decent actor to play the part and radically change what the son was like in Skull.

Ford could still be central to the film and play a role similar to Connery in Crusade, but obviously a new decent actor and version of the son, whatever the hell he was called will be needed.

They will probably get Jai Courtney or someone /shudders.

Sad Professor

Lucas can be involved if he wants. Personally I can't see Spielberg doing it without him, even if he doesn't allow him to dictate the direction of the story like he did the previous films. If there's bad blood between Lucas and Disney over Force Awakens that prevents his involvement, then I can see Spielberg reluctantly bowing out.

I dunno, until Spielberg and/or Ford say they have a story that they are excited about, I'm sceptical this is happening.

Mr Freeze

Sad Professor wrote: »

Lucas can be involved if he wants. Personally I can't see Spielberg doing it without him.....

Thats what I would be worried about, I think he (Lucas) should be kept well way from it.

Wedwood

If they film it mid 2017, there's a year of post production throughout 2018, then a May 2019 release.

That could mean Ford films while 74/5. In fairness, he looks 10 years younger that his actual age, so its just about doable if they go ahead now.

B.A._Baracus

My two cents is that Disney want to mirror what they did in 'Star Wars Episode 7' and with this introduce a new leading man to take over from Ford in future entries (aka, establish and 'push' a new lead so the franchise can continue. You know yourself.)

We all know that was what Crystal Skulls was trying to do with Shia LaBeouf, but no offense to the man I think his stock has gone down in recent years. So... it's doesn't look like he will be the man. Still could be in Indy 5 just to write his character out tho.

Wedwood

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

My two cents is that Disney want to mirror what they did in 'Star Wars Episode 7' and with this introduce a new leading man to take over from Ford in future entries (aka, establish and 'push' a new lead so the franchise can continue. You know yourself.)

We all know that was what Crystal Skulls was trying to do with Shia LaBeouf, but no offense to the man I think his stock has gone down in recent years. So... it's doesn't look like he will be the man. Still could be in Indy 5 just to write his character out tho.

Agreed about LaBeouf, that guy really blew it.

They could introduce a successor like Chris Pratt by making him a brother of Indy. After all, Sean Connery's character was revealed in Last Crusade to be far from chaste. 'I'm only as human as the next guy' says Connery about Elsa Sneider, 'I WAS the next guy' responds Ford.

That way, they're both in the movie and a proper handover to the successor.

Sorted !

py2006

Just watched an interview with Spielberg about Crystal Skull. You could tell he went into it feeling surreal as he had, in his mind, moved on from the franchise and the story had ended with the 3rd one. He was reluctant to do it as he was now (then) into historical dramas. You could also tell he wasn't enamoured with Lucas's alien angle story line.

I think he now realises he didn't go into it with same enthusiasm as originals and perhaps that was reflected in the quality. May be with this one we will see refreshed enthusiasm and may be a yearning to go old school and deliver something good.

I sure hope so...

Edit: enthusiasm is probably the wrong word. I'm sure he tackles all projects with enthusiasm. Perhaps because the story was over for him long ago and didn't think he would ever return it affected his approach?

Sad Professor

I've stopped listening to Spielberg's retrospective thoughts on his films. They are always coloured by the film's box office success or audience reception. It was a flop – "Oh I shouldn't have made that." It was hit – "I loved making that movie!" I don't think he went into Jurassic Park with anymore enthusiasm than The Lost World or Indy 5, yet you'll never hear him piss on it because it was a huge hit.

The issue with Spielberg and Indy is that he was badly bruised by the response to Temple of Doom, which kind of neutered his approach to the franchise.

py2006

Sad Professor wrote: »

I've stopped listening to Spielberg's retrospective thoughts on his films. They are always coloured by the film's box office success or audience reception. It was a flop – "Oh I shouldn't have made that." It was hit – "I loved making that movie!" I don't think he went into Jurassic Park with anymore enthusiasm than The Lost World or Indy 5, yet you'll never hear him piss on it because it was a huge hit.

The issue with Spielberg and Indy is that he was badly bruised by the response to Temple of Doom, which kind of neutered his approach to the franchise.

The interview I watched was actually pre and during production more so than a reflection. At least I think so.

I quite liked Doom but preferred the other two. I didn't realise it came under heavy criticism?

ricero

Could they not just do prequels. I reckon there is plenty of stories of indie vs the nazis to be told. Maybe have an old jones (ford) narrate it

OU812

That's work for me, put Pratt in it & have ford bookend them... telling stories to his grandkids type thing... Film three sets of bookends so if he dies they've got it in the can...

Ridley

ricero wrote: »

Could they not just do prequels. I reckon there is plenty of stories of indie vs the nazis to be told. Maybe have an old jones (ford) narrate it

Disney probably wants one Indy film with Ford that they have distribution rights to before the new guy takes over.

Just please don't be as safe as Force Awakens. I know I'm in the minority in disliking that movie but we've already had Raiders 2 in Last Crusade and for a spell in Crystal Skull to varying quality so I hope Indy 5 has a wider scope than, say, Nazis in Argentina want to use the Spear of Destiny to resurrect Hitler's brain!!

Especially since Spielberg has become less keen on depicting cartoon Nazis.

Looper007

All I'm asking for is please let it be an improvement on Crystal Skull, just give us something that doesn't involve Aliens or Shia laBeouf or CGI Gophers. Let Harrison Ford go out with a bang.

sonic85

A man in his mid 70s can't be a convincing action man even with the best will in the world. There's a physicality required to portray the character effectively that Ford doesn't have anymore. In Crystal Skull which was years ago you could see his range of movement wasnt great what will he be like in a couple of years time?

Either reboot the thing or just let the franchise die. Nothing will ever touch the originals anyway

Agricola

I could see Chris Pratt doing it justice. Playing the stuffy academic might be a stretch, Ford had a quirkiness that really suited the character, but I think Pratt could do a decent imitation of that. The thing is I don't really want to see anyone else play this role.

sonic85

Agricola wrote: »

I could see Chris Pratt doing it justice. Playing the stuffy academic might be a stretch, Ford had a quirkiness that really suited the character, but I think Pratt could do a decent imitation of that. The thing is I don't really want to see anyone else play this role.

I think people read a bit too much into the professor thing - Pratt could be a perfectly fine Indy as long as he tones down the goofy aspect he normally brings to his roles. I think he'd be the best fit - can't really think of anybody else.

Agree with with your last point - Harrison Ford IS Indiana Jones. If he can't play the role anymore id nearly prefer they leave it alone. This is Hollywood though - they're obsessed with wrecking great movies

py2006

sonic85 wrote: »

A man in his mid 70s can't be a convincing action man even with the best will in the world. There's a physicality required to portray the character effectively that Ford doesn't have anymore. In Crystal Skull which was years ago you could see his range of movement wasnt great what will he be like in a couple of years time?

Either reboot the thing or just let the franchise die. Nothing will ever touch the originals anyway

He did a Han Solo pretty well...

sonic85

py2006 wrote: »

He did a Han Solo pretty well...

i cant comment on star wars because I didn't see it but ill take your word for it. im only going on the last Indy movie and he was poor enough in that

py2006

sonic85 wrote: »

i cant comment on star wars because I didn't see it but ill take your word for it. im only going on the last Indy movie and he was poor enough in that

Nobody will disagree with you there and I think that is why another is being made.

Sad Professor

Steven Spielberg Enlists a Familiar Writer for 'Indiana Jones 5'

David Koepp.

If "real artists ship" can be applied to screenwriting, then Koepp is the master. This is good news for anyone expecting the film this decade and suggests Disney are serious about meeting the 2019 release date.

It's not clear if there's a story that Koepp is working off.

Chain Smoker

Sad Professor wrote: »

Disney are serious about meeting the 2019 release date.

I'd say they're serious about getting it done while Ford is still alive more than anything.

py2006

Ford has a couple movies to do in between too. One of which is a Blade Runner Sequel.

sonic85

sonic85 wrote: »

I think people read a bit too much into the professor thing - Pratt could be a perfectly fine Indy as long as he tones down the goofy aspect he normally brings to his roles. I think he'd be the best fit - can't really think of anybody else.

Agree with with your last point - Harrison Ford IS Indiana Jones. If he can't play the role anymore id nearly prefer they leave it alone. This is Hollywood though - they're obsessed with wrecking great movies

Fillion

Sad Professor

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Fillion

10 years/kilos ago maybe.

Sad Professor

Sad Professor wrote: »

10 years/kilos ago maybe.

Age of Ford doing first Indy?
Size of Pratt doing Parks&Rec?

Sad Professor

Deleted User wrote: »

Age of Ford doing first Indy?
Size of Pratt doing Parks&Rec?

Ford was 38 when he made Raiders. Fillon will be 46 by the time the next Indy goes into production and that's being optimistic.

Sad Professor

Sad Professor wrote: »

Ford was 38 when he made Raiders. Fillon will be 46 by the time the next Indy goes into production and that's being optimistic.

Yeah, so it can easily be set after Raiders (hell slight rejig and it's after Crusade) and continue the story. OR reboot

Pratt would be a reboot or prequel setting only, I also don't know if he can pull of the more serious/academic side of Indy. Would it be Peter Quill in a sable fedora and whip? (he already has a satchel to be honest)

Dair76

I like Pratt a lot, but I don't think he's right for the role either. However, let's not pretend that the more "serious/academic side of Indy" required an acting masterclass from Ford. They basically slapped him in a bow-tie and spectacles.

Dair76

Dair76 wrote: »

I like Pratt a lot, but I don't think he's right for the role either. However, let's not pretend that the more "serious/academic side of Indy" required an acting masterclass from Ford. They basically slapped him in a bow-tie and spectacles.

True but it suited his awkwardish acting

Tony EH

This will be simply awful. Ford is too old now. It'll look ridiculous. Frankly, he just about scraped by in 'The Force Awakens' there are some real cringy moments in that.

Indiana Jones is a prime example of a franchise that should have been locked away in 1984 in the same warehouse as the Ark.

Raiders and Temple of Doom...that's all. The others are rubbish.

Zubeneschamali

Tony EH wrote: »

Raiders and Temple of Doom...that's all. The others are rubbish.

Most people (including Spielberg) seem to thing Temple of Doom was a miss, and Last Crusade was a hit.

I think everyone agrees the Crystal Skull was a miss, but Harrison Ford being too old was not the problem there - Lucas and Spielberg were the problem. Fridge nuking, interdimensional aliens, Mutt as a greaser, CGI gophers - this stuff is all the fault of Spielberg and Lucas.Per wikipedia: Screenwriters Jeb Stuart, Jeffrey Boam, Frank Darabont, and Jeff Nathanson wrote drafts before David Koepp's script satisfied the producers.That's the same Koepp Disney have announced for this one.Not getting my hopes up.

Tony EH

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Most people (including Spielberg) seem to thing Temple of Doom was a miss, and Last Crusade was a hit.

I've never been big on aligning my views to what most people think.

To me 'Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom' is the far superior picture and the only reason Speilberg says it isn't, is because a few cotton wool parents and their mardy arse kids got a bit upset by some of the visuals. If the situation was reversed, so would his words be.

Spielberg fucked it up though in 'Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade' and tried to insert comedy instead of (mild) horror on the back of that. Comedy which falls flat on its face every single time and sends the film too far down stupid street.

Until the fourth one came along 'Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade' was easily the weakest entry in the series. It's just a parody. Some stuff works well, like the dad/son stuff between Ford and Connery and there are some good sequences, like the tank set piece. But, it's littered with the most unffunny attempts at laughs that I find it unwatchable and coupled with a story that's just bloody awful, the whole thing becomes a no for me.

There's a certain likeable grit in the first two films that add immensely to the over all feel. A grit that's abandoned in the third film, much to its detriment.

In the end, though, there's really only one truly great Indiana Jones film and that's the first one.

py2006

Wasn't Doom widely criticised for various reasons? I think Speilberg did the 3rd one in response to that. I enjoyed the third one.