Indiana Jones V

[Edward]

I'm not sure if I've ever agreed more with a post written by someone who wasn't me. George Lucas is/was an "idea man". He's good at letting his imagination run wild and coming up with all kinds of stories, characters, environments, etc., but he doesn't seem to actually know how to do anything with that information. Back in the days before Star Wars Lucas was an impressionable college student who had friends like Francis Ford Coppola giving him notes on his scripts. So he makes a few movies, somehow manages to create a couple that strike a chord with audiences and make a lot of money, and he's suddenly expected to duplicate what essentially amounted to dumb luck. He tried, but even he quickly realized he's far better at "delegating" than "doing". (It also gave him someone to place blame on when things didn't go exactly as he wanted, but that's another discussion for another time.) So he becomes the king of his own hill.

I'm convinced the only reason he made the "Prequel Trilogy" Star Wars movies was to stop the fans from asking him, "When are you going to make another Star Wars movie?" He never intended Star Wars to become his entire career, but that's how things worked out for him because his fans didn't seem to care about anything else he did.

Well, except for his participation in the Indiana Jones franchise. Even then, as I understand it, he's the "story guy". He, Steven Spielberg, and Harrison Ford, come up with story ideas, Lucas hires someone to write the script, Spielberg directs, Ford stars. It must be nice to get paid so much for doing so little.

My favourite comment on George Lucas is the persistent rumour that the reason Peter Jackson - after all those comments about having "spent enough time in Middle Earth" bought the rights to The Hobbit purely because he'd heard Lucas had expressed an interest in doing it, and he didn't want it ruined!

 

[Zombie_61]

My favourite comment on George Lucas is the persistent rumour that the reason Peter Jackson - after all those comments about having "spent enough time in Middle Earth" bought the rights to The Hobbit purely because he'd heard Lucas had expressed an interest in doing it, and he didn't want it ruined!

I hadn't heard that one. If it's true, I'm dead certain George Lucas would have done everything in CGI.

 

[Seb Lucas]

With Raiders it's magic wasn't so much what it did, it's what it didn't do, the sillier territory that the sequels strayed into.

That's it in a nutshell. For all it's exaggeration, Raiders has solid characterization, the plot is coherent, the tone serious and it's almost believable. In the sequels, the characters become cartoon-like, the humor is misjudged and the franchise is destroyed by hyperbole.

 

[MikeKardec]

I never cared for American Graffiti, though that may be down to it being a nostalgia piece for a culture alien to me.

Yeah. I grew up cruising Van Nuys Blvd for street races with an older guy who showed how to turn it into a business. I went into film and realized that its overlapping stories, overlapping sound, and show don't tell approach were unique and wonderful. It was made for people like me. I knew every line of dialog. When I started doing Radio Drama I copied or came up with my own version of many of Walter Murch's techniques. I believe it was actually the highest grossing (cost vs return) film ever made until Jaws came out.

I'm not sure if I've ever agreed more with a post written by someone who wasn't me. George Lucas is/was an "idea man". He's good at letting his imagination run wild and coming up with all kinds of stories, characters, environments, etc., but he doesn't seem to actually know how to do anything with that information. Back in the days before Star Wars Lucas was an impressionable college student who had friends like Francis Ford Coppola giving him notes on his scripts. So he makes a few movies, somehow manages to create a couple that strike a chord with audiences and make a lot of money, and he's suddenly expected to duplicate what essentially amounted to dumb luck. He tried, but even he quickly realized he's far better at "delegating" than "doing".

I've met George though I'd never say I know him. We've been at the same functions a couple of times and even a few days flirting with the same young lady (well, younger than George, a bit older than myself). He's a very private man. You might even say shy. You might note how many characters in his films wear masks. I think (pure speculation) that he has to put himself into a certain mindset to get out there and do things in public, be the leader, the director. I have a similar persona I pull on when I have to do certain sorts of work. I can do it, but it's exhausting. My take is that I slightly agree with you but only in the kindest interpretation.

I also think that his interests may gravitate to aspects of film making that are more technical and may (I'm trying to be accurate by being cautious) do certain aspects of the job just so he can do the others ... the ones he cares about more. I was around him between eras, before he rebooted Star Wars. He'd been playing in the purely technical fields for quite awhile at that point. It is possible he wanted a bit of a young man's magic back when he got back into production. Again, more guesswork. We probably spent 90 seconds over three different weekends several years apart discussing film. I've lived in Hollywood a long time. I know when you are hanging out with people WAY above your station you should never do anything to remind them of it because they will clam up immediately. The best thing to do is keep your mouth shut and your ears open.

 

[Tiki Tom]

Are they still planning to release this in 2022? Last I heard, some of the co-stars have been nailed down. The plot/location is still a closely guarded secret. But you would think —if that release date is still valid— that they will have to start filming soon.

 

[Lean'n'mean]

Many may agree with this.

 

[Edward]

Many may agree with this.

As soon as Disney bought the property, it became a moot point. The House of Mouse don't want something they can't make more money out of.

I also remind myself that I saw my first Jones Flick when I was ten, in 1984; in 2021, kids born the year after Crystal Skull was released will be twelve years old. The only real question will be whether it will appeal to those of us who saw Ford, or whether it will be one for the new generation. That said, as reports still are the the effect that Ford will be in a lead role in this new one, my money's still on him play old Indy telling the story in flashback; if the audience accept the new Indy as "younger Indy", then there will be further films without the flashback. I'm trying to keep an open mind on it. I do think they could do it well, but really for me to fully go with it if I'm honest what I want is an actor who, rather than playing "New Indy" will instead be playing Ford playing Indy, a la Karl Urban playing DEforrest Kelley playing Bones McCoy in the Star Trek reboots. I know opinions are split on those films, BUT noone can say the lead actors, especially Urban, weren't fantastic "tribute performances" for want of a better way of putting it. I just hope if Henry Senior turns up they don't try and change him and similarly have a Connery impression. I honestly consider that role the performance of Connery's career, and I wish he'd had the chance to reprise it rather than maybe so of his other, later work.

 

[Zombie_61]

As soon as Disney bought the property, it became a moot point. The House of Mouse don't want something they can't make more money out of...

True, but considering how they've all but completely ruined the Star Wars franchise I'm inclined to agree The Mouse is only going to do the same with the Indiana Jones franchise. Look at their history--Disney doesn't know how to make sequels, good bad or otherwise.

 

[Tiki Tom]

Well, part of me fears that this will be a train wreck. ...But part of me also hopes that Disney will somehow pull a rabbit out of the hat and give us something that is both believable and that plays homage to the original character.

Here is the latest rumor: That Indy will be pitted against an evil Operation Paperclip Nazi Scientist in NY City during the space race. Has possibilities... sidesteps cultural misappropriation issues by placing it in that most exotic of locations, New York City. Not sure how Nazis will fit into the swinging 1960s. And —for heavens sake— I hope they resist the urge to launch Doctor Jones into space (ala the last installment of the most interesting man in the world.). Projected Release date: July 2022.

https://www.cbr.com/indiana-jones-5-plot-nazis-1960s-space-race/

 

[Edward]

True, but considering how they've all but completely ruined the Star Wars franchise I'm inclined to agree The Mouse is only going to do the same with the Indiana Jones franchise. Look at their history--Disney doesn't know how to make sequels, good bad or otherwise.

Ah, now there we do differ. For me, George Lucas ruined Star Wars to the point where I now describe myself as an ex-fan. Disney's hit rate is better - they get a B plus. Lucas had two and a half decent films in his run of six; Disney have had one good Spin off (I still consider Rogue One possibly the best of the franchise), and the first two of the 'new' trilogy were great. Sadly the last of the new trilogy, while by no means Phantom / Clones bad was nowhere near close to what it could have been because the Mouse seems to have run after the incel dollar after the backlash against Part 2 (which seemed to be equal parts prejudice and outrage that they actually made Luke Skywalker an interesting, nuanced character who made choices for himself for the first time in the franchise's history). The only real, unforgiveable stinker Disney have produced was the Han Solo origin picture, which was very bit as dreadful as the first toe prequels.

I should own up to my own prejudices insofar as I've written off the third of the prequel Trilogy without having watch it all because, even though I had the offer of a free ticket, the first two were so unbearably bad I couldn't bring myself to walk 100 yards up the road to the cinema to waste two hours of my life on it. I have seen the one scene many fans have said was worth seeing, which was Vader being put into the armour. Unfortunately the performance (whether fault of the actor, director or editor I can't claim to know for certain) was so bad the whole thing was just laughable to me. Given the absolute lack of quality in the first two and Jedi already having been a bit dodgy, though, I'm certain it's safe to consider it not worth bothering with the rest of Part III.

 

[Edward]

Well, part of me fears that this will be a train wreck. ...But part of me also hopes that Disney will somehow pull a rabbit out of the hat and give us something that is both believable and that plays homage to the original character.

Here is the latest rumor: That Indy will be pitted against an evil Operation Paperclip Nazi Scientist in NY City during the space race. Has possibilities... sidesteps cultural misappropriation issues by placing it in that most exotic of locations, New York City. Not sure how Nazis will fit into the swinging 1960s. And —for heavens sake— I hope they resist the urge to launch Doctor Jones into space (ala the last installment of the most interesting man in the world.). Projected Release date: July 2022.

https://www.cbr.com/indiana-jones-5-plot-nazis-1960s-space-race/

Interesting concept. Man leaving the planet has got to be the real end of the world Jones is from, doesn't it? Interesting idea to bring Jones full circle back to the Nazis as bad guy; the Sixties, here in the UK, was the era when all the "classic" WW2 pictures were made (quite likely the root cause of much of the dangerous wartime nostalgia which is a huge part of the popular culture here in the UK of those who were born in the immediate post-war decade). The space race was a big deal. SciFi. In the US, Star Trek arrived... I know a lot of folks hated the switch to sci-fi (rather than pulp adventure) of IV, but I liked how it represented a switch to pastiching the cinema of the era in which it was set.

Operation Paperclip was also a big part of the plot of Amazon's Hunters, which had its appeal. Plenty of space there for flashbacks to Jones' wartime era working for the US Secret Service, as referenced in Crystal Skull.

 

[MisterCairo]

Many may agree with this.

THIS.

If made, this film and any sequels will be abortions. We have boycotted Disney for years, and will continue to do so for a variety of reasons.

 

[Doctor Strange]

Frankly, I lost any remaining hope for this project when it was announced that Spielberg isn't directing.

It's gonna be another entirely unnecessary, and inevitably disappointing, cash grab. Like a big chunk of everything being made these days with "established properties".

 

[Frunobulax]

Look at their history--Disney doesn't know how to make sequels, good bad or otherwise.

Shoot. And I was so looking forward to Darby O'Gill and the Little People II - The Banshee's Revenge.

 

[Edward]

Frankly, I lost any remaining hope for this project when it was announced that Spielberg isn't directing.

It's gonna be another entirely unnecessary, and inevitably disappointing, cash grab. Like a big chunk of everything being made these days with "established properties".

In truth, I was sort of glad Spielberg won't be involved. I'm not a huge fan of his work; for my tastes, he's been far too saccharine for years. I think we all have to be prepared for the fact it won't necessarily be "our" Indy, just as assuredly as the Mouse didn't spend on buying the property not to make further product with it. That said, I do feel there's a chance that it could actually benefit from a new broom. Someone else who might be able to just do something new with it that really works, rather than somebody as close to it as that.

All done and said, though, with it out of Lucas' hands, the big plus is that we're unlikely to see Disney do what Lucas did to the original Star Wars films - i.e. even if it's awful and we hate it, it's not as if Disney are going to withdraw the originals from availability out of little more than spite!

 

[Doctor Strange]

I think you're being a bit hard on Spielberg, whose prolific filmography is pretty diverse. Sure, a lot of it is insulin-shock inducing, but his more "serious" films - Munich, Lincoln, Bridge of Spies, The Post, etc. - largely strive to avoid easy sentimentality.

Anyway, since none of the sequels have ever approached the four-star brilliance of Raiders (even Last Crusade barely managed three), this series has been about diminishing returns for decades. I'm still smarting from Crystal Skull.

I think that Disney acquired LucasFilm for Star Wars, and Indiana Jones just happened to be part of the package. But if the uneven, sloppy, poorly plotted, fanservice-y new SW films are an example of what Disney's handling of its golden-goose products (*) is likely to come up with for Indy, I'm profoundly unenthused. As Columbia Pictures mogul Harry Cohn once famously said, "Include me out."

(* And let's not discuss the endless live action/CGI remakes of their animated features! Just keep milkin' those cash cows.)

 

[Edward]

I can certainly agree Disney have been flailing wildly for ideas for years on end!

 

[Zombie_61]

I can certainly agree Disney have been flailing wildly for ideas for years on end!

Pretty much since Walt died in 1966. The whole thing was his "vision" and it seems he was the only person who saw it clearly. I'm not saying he or his vision was flawless, but someone has to be Captain of the ship and almost everyone at that helm since Walt has run the corporation into the Matterhorn.

 

[Bushman]

I think you're being a bit hard on Spielberg, whose prolific filmography is pretty diverse. Sure, a lot of it is insulin-shock inducing, but his more "serious" films - Munich, Lincoln, Bridge of Spies, The Post, etc. - largely strive to avoid easy sentimentality.

Spielberg and Lucas combined make up almost my entire childhood (throw James Cameron in there for the complete package). Some of my favorite movies growing up we done by Spielberg, including Jurassic Park, Raiders, ET, and Jaws. Spielberg has cemented himself as a cinematic god in my eyes. The only misstep he's ever done is the 2005 War of the Worlds movie with Tom Cruise.

I think the real magic of Spielberg is he's created movies for all ages. I could continue to appreciate his work as I moved into my teens are started watching movies like Saving Private Ryan, and Amistad, and movies whose subject matter I've only been able to truly appreciate in adulthood like Schindler's List and Bridge of Spies.

I think that Disney acquired LucasFilm for Star Wars, and Indiana Jones just happened to be part of the package. But if the uneven, sloppy, poorly plotted, fanservice-y new SW films are an example of what Disney's handling of its golden-goose products (*) is likely to come up with for Indy, I'm profoundly unenthused. As Columbia Pictures mogul Harry Cohn once famously said, "Include me out."

That's my greatest fear with this upcoming Indy movie. I just know it's going to be a pandering nostalgia fest trying to cultivate all the '80s kids without recreating any of the magic that actually made Indy, "Indy." The character that is Indiana Jones has always been two things to me: intelligent and tough. He's not a wise-cracking action hero, he's a hard-nosed university professor who does what's necessary even if it's not what's right.

(* And let's not discuss the endless live action/CGI remakes of their animated features! Just keep milkin' those cash cows.)

The only reason these are happening is purely for the petty reason of preventing the material from returning to public domain. Disney's bread and butter, going as far back as the Walt days, was taking public domain work, and then copyrighting it. The entire pantheon of Disney Princesses were all public domain until Disney made their movies. The greatest irony is that Disney retains an army of lawyers to come down on you if you so much as consider infringing on THEIR copyright, when Disney itself was built on getting around the copyright of a cartoon rabbit.

 

[Doctor Strange]

Ha!

As someone who collected 16mm Disney shorts in the 70s/80s, I know all about their, um, zeal to retain sole ownership of their library. Disney's lawyers were fearsome to film collectors.

Ironically, we're now perceived as archivists rather than thieves.