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

The only continuation that will carry some weight and possibly some fan goodwill will be to recast Indiana Jones somewhere down the line. A spin off featuring a supporting character won't cut it IMO. They need the Indy name to draw people in to get them interested.

 

They won't recast indiana jones. We got this "rumour" every new movie, and each time it turns out it's not happening. When Harrison Ford retires, no more indiana jones movies, because they know it's not worth the effort, people wont care. People dont want recast. There's enough franchises out there to cash on.

 

Disagree, and I'm not talking in the immediate future after Indy 5 comes out. Whether its in 10 years, 20 years, 30 years... Indiana Jones is too big a property to not dig out again with a new lead. Hollywood will not let something so potentially profitable just sit on the shelf.

 

If her name was Indiana Smith and she married Indiana Jones..

 

This has turned into a real debacle. Have to start wondering if they can hit that release date considering all the time that’s being wasted.

 

I think it because production was interrupt again because of norovirus outbreak among the crew I believe. It will be ready when it is ready, and will be worth the waiting.

 

I love how people take the Daily Mail seriously. I have a bridge to sell them, one you have to make a leap of faith to cross...

 

you guys get Indy news in the mail every day? What a country.

 

Oh ok. my bad :/

 

Yeah, but I think fans would be more open to a remake/reboot of the series rather than a female-led continuation, especially if Disney decides to kill off Indy in the new movie.

 

I would be open to 1930's adventure with a recast Indiana Jones at some point, as much as I love Harrison Ford. I am yet to see 5 of course, and I am interested to see what he do in the 1960s, but I do think Indy work better as a 1930's era character.

 

Just to clarify by new lead, I meant a new actor playing Indy.

I hope they don't kill Indy off in the new one. Theres no need to IMO.

@paradigmes I'm with you in the era of Indy, 1930's is the best for me too.

 

Indy dying would be very sad. I could handle it if it was done properly, but would rather see Indy live. But given it's the Logan director, you never know.

 

Considering that Solo bombed, I’m not sure that recasting Harrison Ford is the wisest move.

 

I think that Solo relative failure was due to weak story and characters, on set issue with the directors and dull cinematography. The actor was the least of it problems. A recast Indiana Jones one day could work as long as script is good.

 

IMO, Solo bombed because of its timing and the lack of promotion. It doesn't make my list of great SW films, but it's not the worst either, by far.

 

You cannot do the continuation of Indiana Jones without Indiana Jones because he is central figure throughout. You could maybe do spin off adventure series, but it would be something else.

 

I still think there was a bit of what you might call a George Lazenby Effect there. (On Her Majesty's Secret Service significantly underperformed the 3 previous James Bond films, despite being a pretty good film in its own right.)

I think you really underestimate the idea that people were profoundly interested in a Han Solo movie without Harrison Ford. I’m not sure why Indiana Jones would be any different.

A similar thing initially happened when they first tried replacing Sean Connery as James Bond. People got used to it after a while, but it really took about a decade before the public fully accepted a Bond that wasn’t Connery.

Another problem is that Raiders of the Lost Ark is a 40-year-old movie, and aside from a brief flashback at the beginning of The Last Crusade and a TV show with low viewership ratings, Harrison Ford has been the only Indiana Jones. By contrast, Bond #5 was wrapping up his tenure when Dr. No hit its 40th anniversary.

 

There was undoubtedly a lot of skepticism surrounding recasting Harrison Ford as Han Solo, but I do agree that the biggest problem with that movie was the marketing. It didn’t start until three months before release, and most people I knew (and I don’t seem to be alone in this) didn’t realize it came out when it did - they were expecting a December release, because three consecutive films at that time had set expectations.

I think the case-in-point of this is that back when the Chris Pratt rumour started around 2014 or so, the general tone around it from casual viewers was relatively positive, because he had just established himself as a funny, likable leading man. Were there this diametric opposition to the basic concept of recasting the role, I don’t think that would’ve been the case.

I think if you nail the casting on an new Indiana Jones actor, and really sell them in the trailers, in addition to marketing the movie as having that classic sense of adventure with a modern scope and effects, general audiences will readily accept it.

 

Was that real world popular, or was it merely Internet popular? I mean, if Internet popularity determined box office, then the two highest grossing films of the last decade would’ve been Mad Max: Fury Road and Blade Runner 2049.

 

I think there's a difference between popularity in movie or sci-fi geek circles, which is where Mad Max: Fury Road and Blade Runner 2049 excelled, and positive reaction from relative "normies," i.e. the kind of people who would've seen the Chris Pratt rumour on the entertainment section of a tabloid site or on Facebook as opposed to a movie or geek website or social media account. I'm more so referring to the latter.

 

I still have my doubts. For example, the TV series Hannibal got EXCELLENT reviews, with especially high praise for Mads Mikkelsen’s performance as Lecter. It still got canceled after only 3 seasons. And I think part of it is that too many people just weren’t interested in seeing anyone other than Anthony Hopkins as Hannibal Lecter.