I can't say I really agree with him on this one. I really would like a Bond-style fate for Indy, with the character living on for future generations to enjoy.
https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/harrison-ford-indiana-jones-replacement
Completely agree with, Ford.
Look no further than that awful Solo movie where that dude tried to pretend to be Harrison Ford... Awful.
Dear future film makers - create new & exciting characters...
Yes, you can still pay homage to famous characters like Indiana Jones, but do it subtly while coming up with something fresh & original.
I might agree with you if there were other franchises carrying the Indiana torch but I don't really think there are any. Nor do there seem to be any on the horizon.
For whatever reason, adventure movies like that are in very short supply. The first National Treasure movie was pretty good, but the sequel was weak, and the third movie seems like it will never be made. And the Tomb Raider movies have all been rather meh, though I did kind of like the first one with Angelina Jolie. Even if they were all great though, they don't deliver what the Indy series does, with its historical setting.
As I said in the OP, I'd be cool with them treating Indy like Bond, and that idea is appropriate considering that Indy was based on earlier adventure serials. Just let the series run perpetually, with new actors stepping in every four or five movies to take their crack at the character.
My only request is that they reboot it and lock the series into the 1930s or 1940s forevermore. I don't want to see Indy running around in the present day.
Sounds like Doctor Who !
share1- I totally agree with him.
If anything, he should stop himself ruining Indy (I consider the excellent trilogy already tainted by that abortion from 20 years after).
2- Wether we agree or not, I think it should be HIS say, not us nor the "property owners" (disney) to decide. He's Indiana Jones, he should have the last word in this.
Considering that Indy IV killed any possibility of the franchise ending on a note of excellence and keeping its perfect track record intact, i really don't mind the idea of future Indy films.
In fact, I welcome it. All I ask for is that the films are actually good. That can be done. Just put the right people on the project.
OK I see your point, I kinda agree with you, but I doubt the "property owners" have any idea of how to handle it. Just look at Star Wars, they are butchering it!
At least Harrison Ford is always Indiana Jones, even when he acts like shit (see old Indy) he won't be able to screw that up!
[deleted]
On this I totally agree. Star Wars effed it up. It's kind of surprising how bad it is. But Harrison doesn't own IJ so it's not his to ru(i)n.
shareI agree that Disney does not seem like the best hands for the franchise to be in, just based on the way they've handled Star Wars. What's done is done in that respect, though.
All we can do now is see what they do with it. I just hope and pray they treat the franchise well and give us some more good movies to watch, in a genre that I think is woefully underutilized.
In any case, the original trilogy will always exist, unaffected by what comes after.
Don't agree. He was fortunate to be cast as Indy, and whoever currently owns the right to the use of the name can do whatever the hell they want. I think Star Wars is being run into the ground -- and that's on them ! Ford can voice his opinion, but he's just a hired hand.
shareSnepts, don't be so corporate.
Hired hand? He IS Indiana Jones.
It's like saying "Spielberg is a hired hand" or "Lucas is a hired hand".
These are the three authors here, and much of the creation is due to how effective Harrison Ford was on screen. Which is: he was awesome, come on!
Kasdan was a hired hand. Other hired hands are the suits at Disney that are gonna try to squeeze money out of Indy. Not Ford: he CREATED INDY.
Ford was fortunate to be cast. And they were fortunate to cast him.
I'm not even a fan of Ford, I think he's a crappy actor and a mediocre human being.
I just know that Indiana Jones is him, that's all, like Neo is Keanu Reeves. Columbo is Peter Falk. Magnum P.I. is Tom Selleck (not Indy). Monk? Shaloub. Are you getting the hang of it?
I agree with the spirit of what you are saying, and I wish Disney was a much smaller business than what it has become, but the reality is if Ford made them $$ being Indy, they will get some bum to try his hand at exploiting the franchise, and it's their right to do that. Hey, the worse Disney looks, the better, as far as I'm concerned. Just enjoy the early forms of films you like and ignore the dreck they put out now. That's how I feel about Star Wars.
I don't understand why you equate directors with actors. And yes, they can all be replaced capriciously, like a woman with boyfriends. She doesn't need a reason. He could have a heart of gold, but she's bored. It's her chess game. Same with the studios.
The thing about Disney is that they seem to ebb and flow as a company. Throughout they're history there have been multiple peaks and valleys.
Right now they are in a peak financially--have you seen how many of the Top 10 spots they've occupied in the past 5 years when looking at the highest grossing films of the year?--but a valley creatively. As far as I can tell, all they care about are big blockbusters, and then mostly just Marvel and Star Wars movies, and live-action remakes of their classics. They're not doing much in the way of smaller films. Occasionally something like Queen of Katwe or Million Dollar Arm might break through, but it's not often.
Snepts I don't equate directors with actors. Directors are directing, actors take their directions.
But in a case like this, where we are talking about the creation of one very specific character, where the performance of the actor is so crucial to that role, then they are on the same level.
BTW, a woman that replaces her boyfriend with a heart of gold out of boredom is not righteous, and I almost completely blame him for wasting his efforts like a fool after such a skank!
I agree and disagree, all at the same time.
I have never been a big Harrison Ford fan, so I wouldn't mind seeing another actor play the role. However, today's actors, writers, directors, etc, are so lousy that I really don't want to see them mess around with the franchise.
I know there was some talk a little while back about Chris Pratt taking over the role. He would bring a distinctly different flavor to the character, but I think it's an interesting idea.
shareTotally selfish ego driven thing to say, he's an actor, he did not create the role but merely played it and many actors have played a young Indy already.
Indiana Jones would have been better off if the 4th film had a younger actor playing Doctor Jones set in the 1930's.
I loved him in the first three films, but prefer to see the series set before WWII with a younger actor playing Indiana Jones if the series continues.
1000% agree about the film needing to be set in the 30s.
The 20s, 30s and 40s were all great. They fit the feel of the franchise. But once Indy hit the 50s, something just didn't feel right. It was too late in history. Indy should not exist beyond the 1940s.
And oh God, I hope they never try to make an Indy movie set in the modern day, or anything like the modern day. Can you imagine an Indy movie set in the 1980s? Terrible idea.
When Harrison Ford dies, let Indiana Jones die with him. No-one else, NO-ONE else can play that character, nor should they dare to.
Look at Solo the movie, someone else plays the other character made iconic by Harrison Ford, and the movie flops, BADLY. There's your lesson, right there.
To be fair, I don't really think Alden Ehrenreich is to blame for the failure of Solo, either financially or creatively. That movie has problems, but he's not really one of them.
If the writing had been stronger and the film hadn't been fucking dreadfully dull then it could've succeeded. Also, I think part of its poor financial performance was backlash against The Last Jedi.
Ehrenreich was less of the problem than the script and supporting cast.
Whatever casting dept idiot is in love with Woody Harrelson needs to piss the hell off.
And seriously...Emilia Clarke soiling both the Star Wars AND Terminator franchises with her presence?
Get a clue, Disney.
I actually thought Clarke was one of the better casting decisions in Solo. . .
shareBe honest...
It was a cheapassed attempt at attracting Game of Thrones fans.
Let’s face it...they realize their casting of buttugly people in “The Last Jedi” is catching up to them.
Kylo Ren is an ugly mudderphlucker, nobody really gives two turds if Finn dies, and Oscar ain’t no Han Solo.
Nah, I think Emelia Clarke is actually a pretty good actress. She sold me on her abilities when I watched Me Before You and recognized how totally different the character was from Daenerys.
As for it being "a cheapassed attempt at attracting Game of Thrones fans," well you know that's how Hollywood has always worked: Once an actor lands one important role and proves popular, producers are more interested in casting them in other things.
Solo was always gonna flop
Because Star wars fans wont grow up and dont realise they cant have the original cast, cos they is old or dead now.
They also dont realise that they arnt going to be as impressed as they were when they were kids.
They gave 'em the same movie at least - blow more death stars up ,
but nothings ever gonna be good enough for the fans.
Personally I managed to enjoy Solo , by not being a whiny fanboy bitch about it.
I don't exactly disagree with him, but at the same time I think they should have stopped at the third one, and he was happy enough to star in a fourth which sucked, and still wants to star in a fifth, and he'll be close to his 80's by then. If he cares that much about the integrity of the character he should have walked away from the project by now.
shareI thought about that as well. Ford was already looking old in Indy IV, and that was 10 years ago. How is he going to look in Indy V? Indiana Jones has always been a very physical role, after all!
But hey, maybe everyone will surprise us and Indy V will be a great send-off for the Ford era. I sure hope so!
[deleted]
I remember when Serenity was released comments about Nathan Fillion’s character Captain Reynolds having the same sort of swagger as Ford’s Solo. He’s probably older than other actors people have in mind but he might work in the role.
shareHe the first but characters like this are from books and comics. Actors bring them to life but there's plenty of room to keep them going. Batman has been in films since the 40s and there's plenty of people who like all the different actors.
If a high quality Indy film was made with a new actor people would love it.
The deal with Solo was they cast a short actor who kinda looked like Ford and attempted his mannerisms. That's an instant fail. It's like a band trying to be popular by acting like The Beatles. You can only be popular by doing it your own way. So, for Indy, Solo they need actors who have the right look but also bring their own interpretation to the role.
I can't believe you're comparing Batman to Indiana Jones. First off Batman is a comicbook character first and foremost. And he's had comics since the 1930s. That makes there always be lots of material and stories they can adapt. It's not the same for Indiana Jones. Indiana Jones is a movie character. Harrison Ford played him best. I never liked the Young Indiana Jones series. My parents bought a VHS tape of it years ago. Anyway, for most fans Harrison Ford is Indiana Jones. Nobody else can play the role. You can argue about the James Bond franchise all you want but it's obvious that was never George Lucas' or Steven Spielberg's idea for the character. Otherwise they would've just recasted in the 90s and continued.
Frankly I don't want a reboot or recast sequel of any of these movies. The only classic movie I want remade is First Blood because the first movie screwed up Teasle's character from the novel and turned him evil which was something that was just made up for the movie. Plus if it was more like the novel it'd be vastley different from the original film. [spoiler]Since Rambo and Teasle both die[/spoiler] at the end of the novel.