or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Indys coming back!!

post #1 of 92
Thread Starter 
I have not seen any info posted on AVS about this, so here it is:http://www.theraider.net/news/fullst...dy4.php?id=117 Damn, its about time We will have our share of forum members putting down Ford for his age, etc. Let them do their job, and then see how it turns out. I'm rooting for this one.
post #2 of 92
Good, let me be the first.

Sometimes, you can't go home again.
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000148/
Photo taken 2006
Born: 1942. Age = 65

Not a chance in hell.

Unless the movie is made as a deliberate comedy playing to the age of the character.
I saw him in an interview he did on Leno or Letterman last year in HD, after his last movie about the bank, he was reluctantly promoting it. The guy looked ancient. I mean he looked like a Shar Pei wearing a spiky-hair wig. :P

I love his work, but these guys are definately 10+ years past making any credible Indy film.
post #3 of 92
Thread Starter 
They will be playing to the age of Harrison Ford my friend. Lets see how they do with the film before we count them out. Shall we see what you look like at 64 Deal?
post #4 of 92
I wouldn't be starring in an Indiana Jones movie at 64

And I agree with some other analysis about the franchise I read on another board:
Why are they doing this?

Raiders was the best action movie, possibly, of all time. Action/Adventure.

Temple of Doom was marginal at *best* and Last Crusade was barely a step above that, and thats largely thanks to the Sean Connery presence.

This is a movie that can only bring the franchise down....
post #5 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blasst View Post

They will be playing to the age of Harrison Ford my friend. Lets see how they do with the film before we count them out. Shall we see what you look like at 64 Deal?

Who cares what the poster looks like at any age, he's not in question here Harrison is.
I loved the other 3 movies but I'm also afraid this is little too late. We shall see.
post #6 of 92
Well, I'm sceptical myself but- Harrison IS in good shape for 64 and if the movie confronts his (i.e., Indy's) age head on and works it into a good story you could have a good movie.
post #7 of 92
Well, with Spielberg tied up making stupid movies, at least he won't be trying to make great movies stupidly. That's good I guess.
post #8 of 92
In this one will he be fighting the communists in the 1950's?
post #9 of 92
Hopfully it will will be good, I just watched firewall the other day and I must say I don't know about ford running around.

Although stallones about the same age and he's doing another rambo film.

Makeup can do wonders with anyone so they could make him look really good ad well as athletic.
post #10 of 92
He's in shape and has a presence like no other actor. They can make him look like he's in his early 50's on film if they want. The hat is aways on so forget the bad hair days. I'm looking forward to this because Ford is my favorite 'Mid Generation' actor.

Flan
post #11 of 92
If Firewall is any indication his action days are long, long behind him. His one stunt is the "Item blows up behind him and he falls face forward". Did it in the Jack Ryan films, did it in Firewall, did it in all his movies. Now, the problem is, thats his stunt..his one stunt....and the older he gets the more it looks like "explosion blast just knocked grampa over".

Now if they get connery onboard, before he dies I might add, then maybe they can play up GRUMPIER OLD MEN IN ARCHEOLOGY or something :P
post #12 of 92
One of my favourite Bond films was Never Say Never again with Sean Connery as an aging Bond. If they can do something similar with Indy then I think it has potential.

"Grumpy Old Archeologists" - great title, HeadRusch!!!!
post #13 of 92
Dear god, someone actually liked Never say Never!?!?!

Seriously though, I loved View to a Kill...and that had a VISIBLY aging Roger Moore at the helm. The thing is, though, that by that point Bond movies weren't the bang-up beat-em-up action films they used to be, they were relying more and more on "prop stunt" sequences than actual physical activity by the star. Lots of huge battles where Moore basically just ran through them, often with the damsel in distress in tow. So it was ok that Bond was looking like a 60 year old, and not a 30 year old.

Now, this is fine, as I am a firm believer that stunts ruin a movie (action sequences take precidence over an actual plot, and last time i checked Bond wasn't supposed to be a Ninja nor an olympic quality acrobat, which some of his sequences can turn into).

HOwever in an Indiana Jones film I expect some things. Nazi's, for one No way is 65 year old Ford fighting Nazis...well, maybe modern Nazis in the 50's or something

Spielberg and Lucas and Ford will most likely try to do another "Amazing Stories" kind of film...so we know it wont be modern, but it probably wont be feasable to set it in the 40's either.....so its uncharted ground no matter how you look at it.

I guess I had just better prepare myself for a film where the age of the stars is the focus of the movie, lots of self-depreciating humor and such. It could work, because Ford does comedy really well....but at the same time I keep thinking of those last few Star Trek films, which were atrocious.....
post #14 of 92
There's a world of difference between Connery playing an "old Bond" when he was 53 (Never say Never Again) or even Connery playing Jones' geezer father at 59 (Last Crusade) and Harrison Ford playing Jones as a 65 year old!

I'll keep an open mind, but this is going to be hard to pull off.
post #15 of 92
I am also surprised to hear that anyone liked "Never Say Never Again". I will "Never" watch that movie again and regret seeing it the first time around. But a third Indy could be fun if they play up the age factor. Doubt they will though. That would show too much sense for anything Lucas is involved in.
post #16 of 92
The worst thing about the Indiana Jones movies were that the 2nd and 3rd installments were pointless, and barely even blips on the "great movie" radar.

Raiders was in a league of its own...but by the time Temple, and really even Last Crusade had come around, you could tell the huge emphasis was now on Action and Stunts and really not so much on a compelling storyline, because the stories were abyssmal.

Raiders was...well...Biblical in its scope

Temple of Doom was a bad joke..all it needed besides the ditzy blonde and yammering boy sidekick was a talking dog and then it would be a Disney movie, and Last Crusade was sort of "lets try to recapture Raiders look and feel"...but even it is a movie I saw once, and never needed to see Again...it was a ripoff of Raiders. And of course today....you watch it and wonder if you're watching The Davinci Code

Seriously, when you've rescued the Ark of the Covenant, how do you top that?

Where are they planning on going with this movie....unless they need to find the Ark again, seriously, what storyline would top that?
post #17 of 92
Temple of Doom is an underrated gem my friend....you don't have a sense of humor (or at least the ability to suspend disbelief) People like you made Spielberg disown the film.

I was almost 4 when it was released in 1984 and grew up watching it and loving it.

Same with Last Crusade ( a ripoff of Raiders!?!?--please Return of the Jedi was a definite remark of Star Wars but you are incorrect here)

A Disney movie with human sacrifice featuring the ripping out of a still beating heart? I'm there!
post #18 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkultra View Post

Temple of Doom is an underrated gem my friend....you don't have a sense of humor (or at least the ability to suspend disbelief) People like you made Spielberg disown the film.
I was almost 4 when it was released in 1984 and grew up watching it and loving it.

Spielberg disowned the film (which I dont believe he did) because it sucks.
Its just not anywhere near in the same vein as Raiders. If Raiders was a friday night movie, Temple of Doom is the saturday afternoon kids matinee feature.

Quote:


Same with Last Crusade ( a ripoff of Raiders!?!?--please Return of the Jedi was a definite remark of Star Wars but you are incorrect here)

Crusade was a definate ripoff of Raiders....they looked at what made Raiders work, and Temple bomb. Nazis...great movie villians.....bring back the "biblical" feel, that gives it an epic scope.."Wow the REAL holy grail?". It wasn't as good as Raiders because it seemed more like a loosely tied together string of action sequences, but it was definately a ripoff. Or, if you prefer a different adjective, a definate homage' to Raiders.

Quote:


A Disney movie with human sacrifice featuring the ripping out of a still beating heart? I'm there!

You were, it was called Temple of Doom...the movies one sole act of visual violence, every film needs one to "set the tone for the villian"......a guy with a knife.

Temple Sucked. Its not the worst movie ever made, but its a far, far, far cry from what people were expecting.
post #19 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean Nelson View Post

One of my favourite Bond films was Never Say Never again with Sean Connery as an aging Bond. If they can do something similar with Indy then I think it has potential.

"Grumpy Old Archeologists" - great title, HeadRusch!!!!

They should consider bringing Sean Connery back as Indy and Harrison Ford as his father.

Sean seems to have aged better than Harrison.
post #20 of 92
Last night Letterman talked about the new Indy, saying the title is to be "Indiana Jones and the Quest for His Reading Glasses". Later he said it's to be "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Lipitor". Even later he played a sneak preview showing an elderly guy playing the spoons to the Indiana Jones Theme music. I was dying!

"Raiders" was absolutely wonderful, but I don't know.....
post #21 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeadRusch View Post

Dear god, someone actually liked Never say Never!?!?!

Seriously though, I loved View to a Kill...and that had a VISIBLY aging Roger Moore......

That explains everything. Whenever I see Roger Moore on screen in any movie I expect to see him break out into a dance routine to some Village people music. What an embarrassment to the Bond franchise. The Bond producers should have just hired a woman instead of Moore for those films. How does anyone use the words "seriously" and "Roger Moore" in the same sentence? I'm going to have to find you on Xbox Live and kill you in Gears Of War for making this statement.

As far as Ford being too old.....no way. Speilberg is a f@#$ing magician and this movie will be just as fun as all the others - with even bigger stunts. This film is going to be Paramount's biggest hit next year.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HeadRusch View Post

Raiders was in a league of its own...but by the time Temple, and really even Last Crusade had come around, you could tell the huge emphasis was now on Action and Stunts and really not so much on a compelling storyline.......

Compelling storyline? You're hilarious. This whole franchise was built on action and stunts starting with Raiders.

If Connery and Bay could pull off The Rock at age 66, I'm sure Ford and Speilberg will pull off Indy at age 65.
post #22 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Herman View Post

That explains everything. Whenever I see Roger Moore on screen in any movie I expect to see him break out into a dance routine to some Village people music.

You're confusing homosexuality with British politeness

Quote:


As far as Ford being too old.....no way. Speilberg is a f@#$ing magician and this movie will be just as fun as all the others - with even bigger stunts. This film is going to be Paramount's biggest hit next year.

Speilberg has nothing to do with it.......it'll be George Lucas and a thousand guys at Skywalker Ranch digitally cleaning up every frame of Harrison Ford's withered turkeyneck skin, liver spots and thinned out hair....he is the MAN...but kicking bad-guy asses at 65? Diving from danger and swinging on that bullwhip? ********.

Quote:


Compelling storyline? You're hilarious. This whole franchise was built on action and stunts starting with Raiders.

No, thats every other forgotton movie that was similar...but sucked. Raiders worked because it was story and character first, stunts second. Try Remo Williams: The Adventure Begins for an example of stunts first, story and character second.

Quote:


If Connery and Bay could pull off The Rock at age 66, I'm sure Ford and Speilberg will pull off Indy at age 65.

Running and gunning is not the same as running around with whips and fisticuffs. I'm sure Harrison Ford at 65 can look good firiing an automatic weapon as well as the next guy....but to see him jumping from falling boulders or some other implausable-but-pretty visual effects will require 100% of Lucas's Skywalker Ranch rendering time

A better comparison would be Connery as a Soviet Naval Captain of a Submarine versus Ford as a Soviet Naval Captain of a Submarine. THAT worked......
post #23 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeadRusch View Post

No, thats every other forgotton movie that was similar...but sucked. Raiders worked because it was story and character first, stunts second. Try Remo Williams: The Adventure Begins for an example of stunts first, story and character second.

The Indy films worked because of action, stunts and Harrison Ford. If Tom Sellic would have taken the Indy role (and thank God he didn't), Raiders would have been another forgotten film a la Remo Williams.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HeadRusch View Post

You're confusing homosexuality with British politeness.

I don't think so but ok.


Quote:
Originally Posted by HeadRusch View Post

Speilberg has nothing to do with it.....

He's only directing it.
post #24 of 92
Quote:


The Indy films worked because of action, stunts and Harrison Ford. If Tom Sellic would have taken the Indy role (and thank God he didn't), Raiders would have been another forgotten film a la Remo Williams.

Could not disagree more strongly. All Indy scripts, characters, settings, stories, action, production values, and dialogue are 10 million light years ahead of anything in Remo Williams, not to mention Tom Selleck is a damn good actor. Pity he could never escape the Magnum character. He kicks much as in westerns though.
post #25 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Herman View Post

The Indy films worked because of action, stunts and Harrison Ford. If Tom Sellic would have taken the Indy role (and thank God he didn't), Raiders would have been another forgotten film a la Remo Williams.

Maybe for you, once I got past the boulder-chase in the beginning I couldn't care less about any of the other silly "action" sequences, that wasn't what made the film interesting. I thought the whole film's mystique was what sold me on it....the map room...the cool "tomb" that had been undiscovered for thousands of years.....and Ford pulling off the character really well. The story, not just some dude fighting it out on a truck like some modern "brawl on the stagecoach"....The rest of it was just mindless action nonsense....of course, since thats the kind of film that Joe 6Pack wants today, no doubt they'll have another masterpiece on their hands.

A few dogfights, or some trapeeze action with bullwhips..maybe a nice car chase....and half of america will be standing in line to buy tickets :P

Quote:


He's only directing it.

Right...which wont help when your action star is 65 and showing it.....Lucas on the other hand will have lots of guys airbrushing every frame of film, unless 'berg shoots it digitally in HD, in which case they can just digitally superimpose HF's face on someone else's body! Jar-Jar Jones!!
post #26 of 92
Yeah I like Harrison in those movies too, but really, he was just Han Solo wearing a fedora cracking a whip.
post #27 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeadRusch View Post

Maybe for you, once I got past the boulder-chase in the beginning I couldn't care less about any of the other silly "action" sequences, that wasn't what made the film interesting. I thought the whole film's mystique was what sold me on it....the map room...the cool "tomb" that had been undiscovered for thousands of years.....and Ford pulling off the character really well. The story, not just some dude fighting it out on a truck like some modern "brawl on the stagecoach"....The rest of it was just mindless action nonsense....of course, since thats the kind of film that Joe 6Pack wants today, no doubt they'll have another masterpiece on their hands.

A few dogfights, or some trapeeze action with bullwhips..maybe a nice car chase....and half of america will be standing in line to buy tickets :P



Right...which wont help when your action star is 65 and showing it.....Lucas on the other hand will have lots of guys airbrushing every frame of film, unless 'berg shoots it digitally in HD, in which case they can just digitally superimpose HF's face on someone else's body! Jar-Jar Jones!!

On the one hand you're saying these films aren't about action, they're about story, but on the other hand your saying Ford can't pull off the "silly" action.....which doesn't matter to you anyway? Ummm ok. Either way - doesn't matter - your opinion has lost bucu credibility with me since that Roger Moore comment. Hey - how about we wait and see how good the film is next summer and if Spielberg and Ford could actually pull it off. And I have to tell you that I'm really worried about Spielberg, Lucas and Ford making a bad movie together.

Terrel,
I never compared any Indy film to Remo Williams. That was our official AVS resident Roger Moore fan, Headrusch. (you are never living that one down buddy )
As far as Selleck being a "damn good" actor, I'd agree if all he made were Westerns. He is very good in Westerns. Anything else and I'm looking for Higgins and a red Ferrari. Oh and Tom Selleck playing Indiana Jones would be as memorable as David Keith in The Further Adventures of Tennessee Buck. No way would the Indy franchise be as legendary as it is without Ford - and he's going to do it again next summer.

Herm
post #28 of 92
I digs me some Roger Moore
post #29 of 92
Possible titles:


Indiana Jones and the Early Bird Buffet

Indiana Jones and the Damn Kids On His Lawn Again

Indiana Jones and the Gold Bond Medicated Powder

Indiana Jones and the Liver Spots of Doom

Indiana Jones and the Long Rambling Stories That Don't Go Anywhere And Don't Have Any Point

Indiana Jones and the Always-On Left Turn Signal of Doom

Indiana Jones and the Shuffleboard Tournament of Doom

Indiana Jones and the Very High Waistline

Indiana Jones and the Oh My God What the Hell Happened To Harrison Ford?

Raiders of the Matlock

post #30 of 92
See this is one of those things where I have mixed feelings. I loved Raiders and, because of Connery's character , I liked The Last Crusade but there is a point where it just isn't acceptable with aging. If an attempt is made to do the Jones of Raiders ,and he looks like he does now, this is simply going to be a laugh. If they make him into an older guy sort of coming out of retirement to give us what experience can net him ,and throw in laughs regarding what he can't do any more , this could be a ton of fun !

Art
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home