Junior Shark Posted May 25, 2016 Author Posted May 25, 2016 So now that Alden Ehrenreich is the new Han Solo, maybe they'll cast him as a young Indy? Quote
ChiefPie Posted May 25, 2016 Posted May 25, 2016 I'm hoping Lego makes some more Indiana Jones sets because of this movie. We need old man Indy! Quote
pittpenguin123 Posted May 25, 2016 Posted May 25, 2016 (edited) So now that Alden Ehrenreich is the new Han Solo, maybe they'll cast him as a young Indy? Fords been confirmed im pretty sure. also alden says han will be the last part he plays Edited May 25, 2016 by pittpenguin123 Quote
Actor Builder Posted May 26, 2016 Posted May 26, 2016 (edited) Fords been confirmed im pretty sure. also alden says han will be the last part he plays He has. That's weird...Why would someone (Alden) limit themselves like that, I wonder? Edited May 26, 2016 by Actor Builder Quote
pittpenguin123 Posted May 26, 2016 Posted May 26, 2016 Jurassic Park was based on a novel. I read it the other day. Waaaay difernt john Hammond was a total jerk Quote
xboxtravis7992 Posted May 26, 2016 Posted May 26, 2016 I've never seen the original movie in its entirety... We rented a DVD once and it fizzled right at the scene with the cartoon about the mosquitoes and sap. I have seen all of Jurassic World though, snooze... Wait isn't this an Indy 5 thread? :) Quote
Actor Builder Posted May 26, 2016 Posted May 26, 2016 Wait isn't this an Indy 5 thread? :) Yes, some member who I will not name derailed it! :D Quote
pittpenguin123 Posted May 26, 2016 Posted May 26, 2016 Yes, some member who I will not name derailed it! :D Yah that guy was a real jerk... -trys to throw voice- We should forgive him! Quote
Actor Builder Posted May 27, 2016 Posted May 27, 2016 We should forgive him! Oh good, thanks for that. In a desperate attempt to rerail this thread, I'll say I dearly hope that this film is good... I hope it's like Star Wars VII, and that Crystal Skull was just like a shortened version of the catastrophe that was Star Wars I, II, and III. I hope Disney does it good. Quote
Columbus019 Posted June 4, 2016 Posted June 4, 2016 (edited) Totally didn't hard this... must be living under a hard rock... But seriously, 2019?!?! I was worried last time that he might be too old to pull it off in 2008 and I was worried about TFA in 2015. Eleven years after KotCS. Well, I guess if anyone could possibly still have it in him, it would be Harrison Ford. I thought KotCS was bad due to writing and directing, but I think Harrison Ford did what he could. Maybe this time with George Lucas out of the equation it could work. Don't worry, Harrison Ford found the Holy Grail and Drank from it and got EVERLASTING LIFE!!!!! Please don't point out that you have to be in some specific temple to make it work! Long Live Harrison Ford So now that Alden Ehrenreich is the new Han Solo, maybe they'll cast him as a young Indy? wait WHAT??????????? Nobody can be Indy or Han Solo but Harrison Ford Columbus Edited June 4, 2016 by Columbus019 Quote
Blondie-Wan Posted June 21, 2016 Posted June 21, 2016 (edited) There actually are in fact four other main actors who've taken on the role of Indy at other ages, but each of them covers him at a specific age or age range that doesn't overlap with the other actors' portrayals. When people talk about recasting the character, they usually seem to mean having someone around the age range of Indy in the first three movies, in that same time frame, and I have to say I don't really care for that at all. I need this movie to exist now (but only if it were brave enough to be completely self-parodying. I don't to see Indy taking on dinosaurs for real. ) Already done, actually, though not as a movie. Granted, crystal skulls had also already been done several times before the fourth movie... I thought KotCS was bad due to writing and directing, but I think Harrison Ford did what he could. Maybe this time with George Lucas out of the equation it could work. He's not; George is still on as executive producer, though it's not clear whether he has any story involvement. I'm a lot more forgiving of the fourth movie than lots of others, but I acknowledge it's flawed, and the worst of the four; I don't think it's irredeemably terrible, though. Moreover, it had a long and difficult gestation, with unique circumstances that wouldn't necessarily be repeated on subsequent movies. The people I'm concerned about aren't Lucas, Ford, or Spielberg; they're Koepp and Kaminski. But both of them have done decent work as well, and I'm hopeful. Edited June 21, 2016 by Blondie-Wan Quote
Blondie-Wan Posted July 9, 2016 Posted July 9, 2016 The missing "s" from Indy's name in the thread title is really vexing. Quote
CMP Posted July 9, 2016 Posted July 9, 2016 The missing "s" from Indy's name in the thread title is really vexing. Maybe it's not a mispelling, and the film focuses on Indy's long-lost twin sister, Indiana Joan. Quote
General Magma Posted July 9, 2016 Posted July 9, 2016 Maybe it's not a mispelling, and the film focuses on Indy's long-lost twin sister, Indiana Joan. Bit odd, wouldn't that be? You guys would be here discussing the fifth "Indiana Joan" movie when the first hasn't even come out yet. Quote
pittpenguin123 Posted July 10, 2016 Posted July 10, 2016 Bit odd, wouldn't that be? You guys would be here discussing the fifth "Indiana Joan" movie when the first hasn't even come out yet. It be like star wars Quote
Blondie-Wan Posted July 10, 2016 Posted July 10, 2016 (edited) Maybe it's not a mispelling, and the film focuses on Indy's long-lost twin sister, Indiana Joan. He actually does have a sister, but her name was Susie and she died very young (likely before Indy himself was born, and was possibly stillborn). We've seen enough of his early life to know he doesn't have a full sister that's alive and that we haven't seen, unless for some reason their parents gave her up for adoption or something before having Indy. He could conceivably have a half-sister (by his dad with some other woman), but it's unlikely. Edited July 10, 2016 by Blondie-Wan Quote
CM4Sci Posted July 10, 2016 Posted July 10, 2016 The missing "s" from Indy's name in the thread title is really vexing. I just noticed that How did I not notice it... Quote
Columbus019 Posted August 4, 2016 Posted August 4, 2016 I don't understand why this, and not the blade runner sequel, is coming out in 2019, as blade runner is set then. Columbus Quote
Blondie-Wan Posted August 4, 2016 Posted August 4, 2016 I don't understand why this, and not the blade runner sequel, is coming out in 2019, as blade runner is set then. It's coming out that late mainly because Lucasfilm is part of Disney now, so it has to fit into Disney's schedule, and between all the Star Wars, Marvel, Pixar, and other blockbuster Disney releases that have already been planned a while, July of 2019 is probably the first slot they had available where it wouldn't be competing with one of its own corporate family members. (Thanks to which mod fixed up the thread title - I appreciate it!) Quote
Tariq j Posted August 6, 2016 Posted August 6, 2016 It would be great to see if the scene or explanation as to how Indy lost his eye. And possibly show his future family that we see in the TV Show. It would be great to see if the scene or explanation as to how Indy lost his eye. And possibly show his future family that we see in the TV Show. Quote
Littleworlds Posted August 7, 2016 Posted August 7, 2016 With a harrison ford of this age the film is really unneccessary. Kindom of the crystal skull already was and I don't see that the next film could be possibly better. I like the actor a lot, but he doesn't do his legacy a favor by playing his old action roles again and again. There are still so many other roles he could play and show off his class as an actor instead. Quote
Blondie-Wan Posted August 7, 2016 Posted August 7, 2016 With a harrison ford of this age the film is really unneccessary. Kindom of the crystal skull already was and I don't see that the next film could be possibly better. I like the actor a lot, but he doesn't do his legacy a favor by playing his old action roles again and again. There are still so many other roles he could play and show off his class as an actor instead. So, your answer is to either cast some other older actor, or cast a young actor and put him in old age makeup, when we already have the perfect actor for Indy? That doesn't make any sense. Quote
Littleworlds Posted August 7, 2016 Posted August 7, 2016 So, your answer is to either cast some other older actor, or cast a young actor and put him in old age makeup, when we already have the perfect actor for Indy? That doesn't make any sense. What about no film at all? Nature will ensure that this will be neccessary sooner or later anyway Also the 1930s have always been his best time, so when it comes to a new actor we will see at least proper villains again too! Quote
Blondie-Wan Posted August 9, 2016 Posted August 9, 2016 (edited) What about no film at all? Nature will ensure that this will be neccessary sooner or later anyway Also the 1930s have always been his best time, so when it comes to a new actor we will see at least proper villains again too! The 1930s are the time for which he's best known to some of us, but the character lives from July 1st, 1899 to at least sometime in the early 1990s. We've seen him in the 1930s (specifically, 1935, 1936, and 1938) - and 1908 to 1910, 1912, 1916 to 1920, 1950, 1957 and 1958, and 1992 and 1993. What we haven't seen is anything in that huuuuuuuuge gap between 1958 and 1992. We also know that he had particularly harrowing adventures in this time period, ones which left him more visibly scarred than anything that had happened to him at any previous point in his life, yet we know nothing about those adventures. Maybe the 1930s are the period people best know him in, but that's the period most in need of fleshing out for his screen biography to be more complete. Edited August 9, 2016 by Blondie-Wan Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.