Indy 5 Indiana Jones & The Dial of Destiny All Aboard the Hype Train to June 2023!

Saying that "Lucas wrote the Indiana Jones movies" is wrong, of course. But to say that he just "came up with the stories" isn't accurate either, because it seems to imply that Lucas' contribution is limited to have an idea for a film ("Hey! Let's make a film about the Holy Grail!")

Lucas develops the story, including all kinds of ideas he wants to deal with, and leads the story conferences with the writer(s), while Steven Spielberg acts more like a passive force during that process (for example, Spielberg was barely involved in the different versions of the "Indy III" scripts that were developed between 1984-1986, writen by other writers but under direct supervision of Lucas). Lucas also writes a story treatment that establishes the story and that treatment is used by the writer(s) to write the script.

 

So long as Karen Allan is in it, I will see it. My mom's major beef with the franchise was that Indy and Marion didn't get hitched at the end. (I watched Raider's with an Aspie friend of mine before we went out of town and while I was outta town, he saw Crystal Skull before I did and told me "Indy and Marion got married!"). She still gets CS and TOD confused, for example:
Me: Hey mom, Indy's on. Wanna watch?
Mom: Is it Raiders?
Me: No, it's Crystal Skull!
Mom: I don't want to. That movie was disgusting.
Me: Mom! Your getting it confused with Temple of Doom. This one has Karen Allen.
Mom: Oh- it's the one with the Russians! Pause it and I'll be right in.

I think my dad took her to see it one night as a mom and dad date night and she get's them confused because of the crystal parts, etc.

 

Some small tidbits here from screenwriter David Koepp on the film, along with the news that Lucas apparently has no involvement with the development of the story. This is going to make some people feel pretty optimistic, and I'm sure it'll piss a lot of other people off.

http://collider.com/indiana-jones-5...idersocial&utm_medium=social#steven-spielberg

 

Count me among the latter. Though, maybe "pissed off" is not the term, just dejected a bit, if not somewhat heartbroken. These truly are my favorite films. If Star Wars is the grape jelly to my sandwich, Indy is my peanut butter. I've always treasured the brainstorming, "sandcastle-building" collaboration between Lucas and Spielberg rooted throuhgout this film series, considering as much an essential part of its character. Removing the former from the equation, I dunno, it just feels hollowed-out. Koepp is a serviceable draftsman and, of course, Spielberg still at the helm at least guarantees a gold standard in set piece storytelling. But I for one will sorely miss what I've always considered an inspired conceptual/thematic engine put in place by Lucas.

Since he's still signed on as an executive producer, I've yet a degree of hope left that some of his core ideas may carry over, if only by mere proxy.

 

I suspect this means we will be getting an Indy movie that has its roots planted firmly in Raiders and Last Crusade. Those are clearly the two that Spielberg loves, and if Lucas isn't involved, then Spielberg is gonna get exactly what he wants. Lucas was always trying to push the boundaries of what an Indy movie was, obviously first with Temple of Doom, which I think is genius, despite the fact that it can't touch Raiders, because nothing can. Then with Indy IV, George wanted to go more 50s sci-fi with the whole Saucer Men angle, which I think would have been genius. But Spielberg fought him on the alien stuff, and what you get with Crystal Skull is a movie that should have been 50s sci-fi, but instead was turned into a classic Indy movie. That's why it fell flat. Because it didn't open any new doors. Last Crusade was a throwback. But Crystal Skull needed to be more original. Now while I wish George was involved, I can't say Spielberg's point of view isn't great, too. Last Crusade was awesome. Who knows? Maybe George will get involved at some point.

 

Well, my hype has dropped considerably.

Call me crazy but I think the biggest issue with KOTCS is the fact Spielberg wasn't too keen on making another Indy and only did it because Lucas really wanted to. While I still prefer it over TOD, I think the movie could have been a lot better if Spielberg had the desire he has now to direct another Indy ten years ago.

 

I highly doubt he will have absolutely 0 influence on it. Let's not forget that George Lucas and Steven Spielberg are friends in real life. I could easily imagine a "So what would you think if Indy did this?" come up during lunch or something

 

I imagine Lucas simply isn't really interested, given that Skull was an idea that he held onto since the 90s and got out of the way as a clear one-off. Of course some people are already framing this as Spielberg dramatically booted him from the process altogether...

 

The original Indy trilogy are easily amongst my favorites of all time, but to be honest the news that Lucas may not be involved in 5 doesn't bother me one bit. I think thats purely because KOTCS was such a disappointment to me story wise. This news has not dampened by enthusiasm one bit.

 

​

​

​

​

​

 

Never bought that rumor from months ago that claimed George would be involved, so this "revelation" just sadly confirmed what I expected.

No matter how you slice it, it just won't be the same. Lucas was the creative source of the series. Without him, we'll just get a cheap attempt to replicate what was done before. Same thing happened with Star Wars.

The Lucas fictional universe is all but extinct.

 

It was always going to happen at some point, but o be honest I expected it once George was no longer with us because Indy and SW are too good to be left sitting on a shelf and in this day and age studios will be remaking those films again and again. It just so happens that Disney are the ones that have done it more quickly than I thought. I don't have any issues with someone else taking the reins.

 

Unsurprising since he's retired now but still a little bit disappointed by this news. First episode VII, now Indy. Oh, well.

 

In many ways the Indy films have allways been far more formulaic than Star Wars, so while GL's lack of involvement with of course have some impact, in the end he will still heavily influence the story, because of the template he and Spielberg created for the series.

 

Not all that surprising that Lucas isn't involved to be honest, but whilst not necessarily "pissed off" it's still disappointing to me nonetheless. That's not to say that they won't make a movie that's entertaining, don't get me wrong I'm pretty sure it will be, but I'm more and more expecting to feel about it the way I did The Force Awakens in terms of missing the "creative spark". Though who knows, perhaps I'll be proven wrong. Just going to have to wait and see I guess.

 

I really liked KOTCS But like a lot of other people felt it could have been a lot better I think Lucas has moved on from big blockbusters like star wars and Indiana Jones Disney is obviously distancing themselves from Lucas and paving this path with Lucasfilms property with some old guard and some new and I support this, I loved TFA!

 

All i'm gonna say about this and IJ/KOTCS is people make fun of it for having aliens, but fail to realize that all 4 of them are essentially love letters to the film tropes in the era they were set it. Having aliens was no more out there or wacky than having people's faces melt right off. Lucas is probably just done with everything anyways.

 

I loved Chariots Of The Gods by Erich von Däniken I actually don't think it is any more out there then anything in the Bible but Even though I really liked KOTCS it still had its flaws most notably the Gophers in the beginning or what ever they were, I also loved the Fridge seen It was even put into pop culture like Jump The Shark, "Nuke The Fridge"!!!

 

Heres the strange thing, in the world of Indy that they'd established in the original trilogy, I struggled to accept aliens as being the focal point of the fourth, I can't buy in to it. But the issues with it are much more than that. The story construction and characterisation would have dragged any macguffin down.

 

My issue is how the alien plot was dealt with, rather than the fact that it was done at all. The issue is that they tried to integrate it into a classic "Raiders/Last Crusade" Indy formula with the ancient aliens concept as opposed to taking the concept to its logical conclusion in regards to the time period. If they had made a '50s sci-fi B-movie with Cold War-era paranoid thriller elements put in (as all good '50s sci-fi B-movies have), but with the kinds quirks and flourishes and craftsmanship that set the original three movies above other inferior films made in the same vein, then I think it would have worked. The problem is that they started with that for the first hour or so; the moment they travelled down to South America is when the movie started to fall apart. And it's clear that there's two different movies being smashed together, since the Roswell aliens that are the focal point of the opening sequence literally aren't even the same kind of aliens that the crystal skull is from. "A distant cousin, perhaps."

 

Pissing off people? Oh yes it has actually.

People have been saying that they want Lucas back now. I haven't found a ton of them optimistic.

 

But that's not really that different to previous Indy movies.

Yes, the opening is about a disconnected mcGuffin. But it's still better integrated than Temple of Doom or Crusade's opening, as it actually establishes the characters and villain, and the mcGuffin is related to the rest of the film, unlike the idol, diamond, or cross in the first 3.

I don't see what's wrong with the shift to South America. Yes, there were a few too many characters. But the Ancient Aliens plotline fits in well with the 50's setting, having been first proposed in 1954.

 

The start in the warehouse is good. It doesn't matter whether its connected or not to the rest of the story. But I don't think its as good as the openings to Raiders and TOD. The film definitely falls apart from the moment they get to South America. Too many people with Indy on the quest, poor humour, not much backstory or point to the skull being returned - its like no one cares, I felt no investment in the characters or their reasons for going there, it feels like theres no peril, poorly written dynamics between Mutt, Indy and Marion - its treated like a joke, Mutt taking too much action, too many cheesy nods and winks to the camera during those scenes - hes a chip off the old block kind of thing, the ending I hated, crystal skeletons turning into aliens before the ship flies off. Its like they had waited so long to get this film done that they just decided to go with whatever they had. I can't believe no one during the production of the film thought 'does any of this make sense'?

My hope is that they learn from the mistakes of KOTCS and I think having seen what they did with TFA that Disney will make sure Indy 5 taps in to what made the first 3 films so good.

 

But again, regarding the ending, it makes a lot of sense.

For one thing, the design of the aliens matches with common 'grey' style aliens that were popular in fiction in the 50's. There spaceship also reflects this, with the simple disc.

I don't really see how the aliens is any more 'out there' than ghosts conveniently killing all the villains, magic stones, or super healing powers.

There are plenty of reasons for returning the skull. Spalko says "there might be hundreds of skulls at Akator", and who knows what else. It's also supposed to be the city of gold, which is what Mac is after.

There's also some interesting thematic material, relating Indy to the aliens. They're both archaeologists, the aliens have a collection of artefacts from around the world, and both are 'past their prime', the Akator civilisation having fallen 5 centuries before.

 

I know people can accept that aliens are no less 'out there' than ghostly appartions, magic stones and an immortality granting cup. For me I don't think it fits with how we know an Indy film to be, I understand people believe aliens are also part of archeology with them being depicted in ancient civilisations and theres a link there. But again I don't think it fits well at all and just because its the 1950's doesn't mean that using aliens was the only way to go to make some kind of cold war sci-fi homage.

I love the paranod sci fi films of that era, The Day the Earth Stood Still, The Thing from Another World, Forbidden Planet, Invasion of the Bodysnatchers, Invaders from Mars are all classics in my book, but for my money sci-fi and Indy didn't mesh well, it was neither one or the other. It was aimless and not executed well IMO.

But more than that the story construction, setpieces and especially the characters fell flat. Which is why I'm convinced Disney will make something in the theme of the originals.