Why indy again?

first let me say I am a huge fan of the Indiana Jones series. Infact I like it more then Star Wars. Why would they make another film in the series.
1. Harrison Ford is way too old.
2. In the last crusade Indy became immortal so we know anything that happens in the next one he will live through.
3. The Last Crusade was a good ending to a great series.
4. Each Indy film is worst then the orginal. Now I love each but Raiders was better then the other two by far. Temple was a little better then crusade. I can't imangine the next one being better then crusade so why make another film besides making money.

---

[color=indigo]No-one's forcing you to go and see it. ;)

Anyway we have discussion on this very topic, so please shift over to here, if you'd be so kind;

[link=http://boards.theforce.net/message.asp?topic=4526660] Indiana Jones IV- A great movie, or a total disaster? [/link]

Also check the forum index for a lot of other discussion on various aspects of Indy IV.
[/color]

 

I would normally agree with that view, but that's because most sequels nowadays are done for the wrong reasons, controlled by studios, directed by inexperienced directors (easily manipulated by the studios), hack direcotrs and the need to try to make them hip.

Fortunately Spielberg is immune to this. I do disagree with some points:

1. I can't understand the aversion to old age, especially if done right. Look at the Star Trek films with the original cast, or Space Cowboys, or the last 2 Lethal Weapons. If handled right it shouldn't matter that Ford and Indy is older. The cult to youth in Hollywood is really disturbing.

2. He doesn't become immortal per se. I think I remember an interview with Spielberg or McCallum or someone that the drink wouldn't make him immortal but it does justify he being very old for the Indy TV series. The only one that was, was the Grail knight sinsce he could continually drink from it. Besides we already know he makes it through because of the Indy TV series, so your point is moot.

3. Agreed. Then again this could help tie the trilogy with the old Indy. Spielberg and Darabont are no hacks.

4. Well I wouldn't use "worst" as the description. Sure I like them in the order they came out. And even though Crusade was my least favorite it doesn't mean it's a bad film, it's still above 90% of the movies that came out then or now. I think that even if the 4th is the weakest of the bunch it'll probably be above 90% of the movies that come out that year.