Discussion in 'Lucasfilm Ltd. In-Depth Discussion' started by WhiskeyGold, Jul 25, 2013.
Just make another Indy... Ford in the mentor role. RECAST Mutt... problem solved.
...let's throw in a Hans Zimmer score as well, John Williams' take is just too old-fashioned. That's sarcasm, folks, in case you missed it.
The James Bond comparison is a good one in that shows how replacing an actor can work.
In 1969 James Bond fans who only known Connery as Bond and the idea of replacing him was just as unthinkable. "Who is this Lazenby guy, Sean Connery IS James Bond" etc... So much so that when Lazenby was out for Diamonds are Forever they went BACK to Connery. But they did it, and they carried on with Moore and Dalton etc... and it become accepted that different actors will play this part.
There is NO reason the same can't/couldn't be true with Indiana Jones. The idea that "Harrison Ford IS Indiana Jones" exists only because no one else has done it yet. If/when someone else does it, that attitude could change just like it did with Connery and Bond.
The big hurdle in recasting Indy isn't Ford, its Spielberg. Spielberg has directed some of the best movies of hte last half century, and the reason we don't have a Jaws re-make and a Close Encounters Re-Make, and more Jurassic Park sequels rather then re-makes etc... is because he owns sequel and re-make rights on most (if not all) of his movies, and I know he owns them on the Indy Franchise. They'd probably have to wait for Spielberg to die, not Ford, before they could re-do that series.
Remember, Bond was only recast out of necessity. Connery got sick of it, the producers failed to realize audiences were not dead set on Connery as Bond, they just wanted a Bond movie, which is why every actor afterwards has flourished one way or the other... although Indy might be different. But we don't really need Ford recast when we have Mutt... Just recast MUTT... problem solved. have Daddy Ford in the next two or three and phase him out... not hard at all. I would rather have a connection to Ford than some idiotic, blasphemous remake that will suffer from MTV editing, rock soundtrack and shaky cam...
You could always CGI Ford into it.
It would must certainly be a sin.
They should just let the films end and that's it as I'm not hungry for any more of them I like them from
Raiders of the Lost Ark
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of Crystal Skull, that film doesn't count and I think they should have left it with Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989) as that seemed like a fitting end for me as cinema-goer.
I have different feelings about this than I do about SW. I'm 100% against ever refilming Episodes I-VI. However: You could maybe do one more film with Ford as Indy but it's getting way too close to recent history for it to relate to RotLA, IMO. Its' edging into an anti-romantic era. Secondarily, we've already had 2 young actors play Indy and they were both fantastic.
For this beloved and enduring character I can actually imagine a --- Shiva forgive me --- soft "reboot". There are plenty of untold years of his life to fill in and if they cast the right person, it could all blend seamlessly. It mostly depends on casting, writing & direction. Now that Kasdan's back in the Lucasfilm family he could come back to send Harrison off and introduce the new guy. I'd rather have him writing Indy than SW, honestly.
So count me in for a cautious vote of "Yes". It could definitely work. Not that I won't miss Harrison; I saw Raiders when it first came out, it definitely made its mark on me. But I can't really see an 80 year old Indy running around the Summer of Love chasing whatever. It just doesn't work.
I can't say it happening, the fans would definitely not be pleased with a recasting. Especially if it was a direct sequel to the first four....
I don't think they can pull a James Bond with Indiana Jones. Bond seemed to always be played by a 30-40 something actor. Had they recast Indiana soon after The Last Crusade with an actor of similar age, and then replaced that actor and so on, they they could have kept Indiana Jones a permanently middle aged character. Instead they waited a long time and kept Harrison as Indiana and thus the character has been shown to age. Who would they replace Harrison with, another Cactor of similar age to Harrison as he was in Crystal Skull or make him younger and go back to an age similar to Harrison's when he was in the first three?
I think they could recast Harrison with a younger actor if they wanted to tell the prequel or inter-film adventures of a younger Indiana Jones, but going forward - short of a reboot - I think they would have to change the character entirely and maybe spinoff into the adventures of a pupil or son.
I would fully support a rebooted Indy series with a new actor in the role. Harrison can't play him forever and if I ever want to see him play Indy again I can just watch the first four (or five I guess). Nothing can take his portrayal of the character away from me and if I don't like the new actor or films I have the choice not to watch them.
Except that 1) Mutt is a terrible character that no one cares about and 2) Re-casting INdy lets them set the movies in the 30's again with Nazi's as the bad guys etc... They can'd do that with Mutt.
The same logic I put forth about Indy holds true for Star Wars, and like it or not, sooner or later we will get STar Wars re-makes.
Star Wars wont' be remade because there will a dozen or more soon enough. No fool is going to do that unless they want to do that to James Bond as well. They only remake stuff when it's been long dormat or even forgotten.
Recast Mutt with a better actor. Have Indy be the touch-passer until he ceases to appear. Star Trek did it without Kirk, same deal here...
NO. Why would that be preferable?
And he'd be voiced by Seth McFarlane.
Well whatever they do it's going to be controversial!
I don't like Mutt going on because the 60's & 70's aren't great eras for pulp adventure. Mutt was a fun character but there's no reason to bring him back, any more than there was to bring back Jacques, Short Round or even Sallah for a third time. My misgiving is having Indy running around in the same world as the Beatles & Timothy Leary. He just doesn't fit. The atomic age was about as far away from the original as I was willing to go. If they do another with Ford, I hope they severely limit the cultural references and keep Indy isolated someplace remote, so we don't have to deal with the 60's.
I hope I don't live to see Star Wars remakes. If it ever happens, let me be dead. They would just suck, before they were ever made they would just be worthless & a waste of time. Ditto any outright Indy remakes. New films with a new actor? I'm Okay with that. Remakes? God please no . . .
Of course it will be, don't lie to yourself. It maybe in 10-15-20 years, but it will be. And we don't know if they suck would be fantastic.
It wasn't just the actor (Even most of that hate came up after the fact and for other reasons), people didn't like the character of Mutt. And as I pointed out, with Mutt the series has to be set in the 50's and 60's, recasting allows them go back to the 30's were the franchise is its strongest.
Star Trek fans LIKED Picard. Hell, many prefer him to Kirk. No one likes Mutt.
I believe they also re-cast Kirk and Spock and co. and the movie was widely successful.
The box-office said otherwise. NO movie I don't care how ****** people want it to be makes nearly $1 billion if it's not liked by some... how the hell did "Home Alone" make so much if it wasn't liked? The character of Mutt was never the problem. I had no problem with LeBeaf until a year or so later when he trashed everyone he worked with. Recast him, reduce Ford's role- boom- Indy 5 will make a billion clams.
BARDAN EDIT: Watch the language
People going to see the last Indy movie doesn't = liking Mutt.
A lot of people hated Jar and Jar and TPM was still hugely successful.
Each movie in a series gets sold by the previous movie, and its box office is largely determined by how much people liked the last one. So talking about box office numbers for either Crystal Skull or Phantom Menace is a little bit meaningless. That, by the way, is exactly why the pressure is on for JJ Abrams - the prequels' bad reputation means that he really doesn't have all that much wind at his back, and he has to knock Episode VII out of the park in order to save the franchise.
It's time let that film franchise die. It's run its course. With the spy world of Bond, there are tons of stories to tell (and still a lot of Bond films feel indistinguishable). How many adventures can an archeologist have? I mean really, that was hard thing to pull off in the first place. It's like making an adventure movie with an anthropologist or a sociologist or a cartographer. They've done all they can with Indy. They went off formula with Temple, and people didn't totally like that one (though it's my 2nd favorite), and then they never came up with a different formula for a storyline in the next films. That's why they returned to Nazis as bad guys in the Last Crusade and then tried to make the Soviets take on the Nazi role in the Crystal Skull. If they strayed from the formula, then it didn't feel like Indy. If they kept to the formula, it came to feel redundant. And what well-known lost artifacts are left to be searched for anyway? What yucky critters are there left to be exposed to--worms, lizards, diseased pigeons?
Ford is the only one to play the part in the 27 years of the franchise. He is Indy. As he's aged, Indy has aged. Harrison's scar on his chin is Indy's scar, and there's a explanation for how he got is in the opening of Last Crusade. They probably shouldn't make another film with Ford (though Ford says GL has an incredible idea for the next one), and I really don't think they should make film without Ford.
...except for River Phoenix, Sean Patrick Flanery, George Hall, Corey Carrier, Neil Boulane, Doug Lee, David Esch, and John Armstrong.
I assume that everyone after River Phoenix that you list appeared in the Young Indiana Jones Chronicles, which had a viewership of something like a million people. Super fans of Indy may think of these others, but the vast majority of people think only of Harrison Ford. In fact, I bet if you asked people to name all the people who have played Indy, 95 out of 100 would say only Harrison Ford, 4 more out of 100 would say Harrison Ford and River Phoenix, and 1 more out of 100 would say: "Ford, Phoenix, and I think there may have been some kids who played him back on some television show in 80's or 90's."
To me, Ford will always be Indy.
But, like it or not, Disney did not buy the distribution rights recently from Paramount just to make one more movie with Harrison in it to wrap up the series. I have a bad feeling about this (heh) but I believe they will one day recast the character. I just hope it's done right and respectful to what came before.
You know, if you asked me 5 years ago, I would have said no way. Then the Star Trek reboot came along and did the impossible by recasting my beloved Kirk, Spock and company, and they pulled it off beautifully. So my answer is yes; but you got to do a darn good job of casting. Come to think of it, Chris Pine is one actor I could potentially see doing it. He's not exactly a Ford clone, but he's scrappy, charismatic and handsome. And hey, he's the new Jack Ryan, so yeah. Sounds good to me. The notion that an actor is a particular character that they're well known for is a strange phenomenon of film, and not altogether a positive one, I might add. And it's particularly funny in this context, since typecasting meant that Ford almost didn't get the role in the first place because Lucas thought he was too closely identified as Han Solo!
But you also need a good story, and I don't buy that it's so hard to figure out new stories for Indy. It's just that Lucas and Spielberg tend to butt heads on this aspect. Excalibur, Atlantis, Staff of Moses, Spear of Destiny, Shangri-La, etc... There's a lot of potential MacGuffins to choose from. Besides, the MacGuffin is never really the point of the story - it's the MacGuffin! It's just the thing that the heroes and villains are going after, and there's no point in getting too hung up on it. I think Indiana Jones is ripe for a "soft" reboot, since each story is supposed to be episodic and self-contained anyway. What I would not want to see is a remake of Raiders for instance - why would you do that if you've gone through the trouble to be able to do anything you want?
I say make Indiana a girl and a guy. A set of twins who are archeologists. The guy is the scrappy fighter and the girl is a inquisitive one. They could be relatives of Indy. Set it for this time period. Like trying to save precious artifacts from being plundered and sold to greedy collectors. Hell you could have the pair going to bat over stolen jewish art. Or something similar. Set Indy up for the new generation. The generation that needs to understand that our past needs to be saved. You have to get out of the library sometimes.
Oh and as an ohmage to a great scene, When Indy pulls out his gun to shoot the big Egyptian. you could have the brother ready to fight with a similar type of guy and instead the sister pulls out a gun and shoots him instead. He looks at his sister and she says, hey get a move on.