Indiana Jones 2023 - Rumors & Discussion

[JeanGreyForever]

30 minutes ago, PGBQW said:

I mean, it's not like they got to see the movie before release.

Like if they'd done any sets at all, they'd been designed at the verly least 1-2 years ago with concept art as a reference.

That's true. I just find it strange that they skipped it altogether especially since KOTCS did get several sets when it was released. Did Lego just sense that there was little hype for this movie as compared to the last one or did the KOTCS sets not sell well enough for them to bother with another untried new installment?

It reminds me of how the Fantastic Beasts movies did get sets for the first two films but by the third movie, there was zero hype or interest with general audiences and it wasn't surprising that there were 0 sets. Perhaps Lego predicted something similar for Indiana Jones.

[Mandalorianknight]

9 hours ago, JeanGreyForever said:

I wonder if Lego deliberately avoided making sets for this movie because they predicted it would be a commercial and critical flop.

Reviewers from Cannes were saying that the scene you mention in particular would be very polarizing for fans.

Between this, Shazam 2, and Flash it feels like they were being a lot more cautious about film releases in general. Even some of the marvel films haven't gotten many tie-ins recently (quantumania).

Ironically, those films all failed commercially and/or critically (though I personally liked shazam 2)

[jimmynick]

I rather enjoyed the new movie and there were some setpieces that could have turned into sets; shame TLG haven't put out a full wave.

12 hours ago, PGBQW said:

I mean, it's not like they got to see the movie before release.

I mean, isn't that how it works for most major media tie-ins?

[PGBQW]

1 hour ago, jimmynick said:

I rather enjoyed the new movie and there were some setpieces that could have turned into sets; shame TLG haven't put out a full wave.

I mean, isn't that how it works for most major media tie-ins?

Yes, that's what I was telling to the other guy

[Legoman123]

I think the way they’ve gone half hearted for Indi is ridiculous.  So many potential sets that could be remade and brand new areas of the previous movies as well and they’ve just chinned it off.  Temple of Doom, The Krystal Skull Temple, The Last Crusade Cup Scene.  I really hope this theme continues but given the cancellations I imagine it’s highly unlikely.  

[Big_Daddy]

I'm not in the least interested in the new cinematic Indiana Jones deconstruction project but it's kinda sad that there won't be any sets. Just like KotCS it could have gotten us some nice vehicles at least.

[Legoman123]

18 hours ago, Big_Daddy said:

I'm not in the least interested in the new cinematic Indiana Jones deconstruction project but it's kinda sad that there won't be any sets. Just like KotCS it could have gotten us some nice vehicles at least.

I am still holding out hope of some sort of D2C KOTCS set, maybe for a release early next year or something. 

[DrHenryJonesJr]

I gave up hope that another diorama could have been planned when I saw that the Raiders tile was not printed, but a sticker had to be attached.

The LOGO was printed on the Star Wars dioramas because it can be used for other dioramas.

The fact that no print was made for Raiders is an indication that no further diorama was ever planned, at least initially.

Likewise, the fact that the small sets did not receive any individual prints and that the diorama is generally printed sparsely, as well as the handling of the complete life cycle of this series strongly indicates that more than initially four or finally three sets were never intended to publish.

If there are more sets coming out, that might be more indicative of the success of the first three sets than the success of the film.

Unfortunately, the film is criticized quite negatively in most reviews

[PGBQW]

1 hour ago, DrHenryJonesJr said:

I gave up hope that another diorama could have been planned when I saw that the Raiders tile was not printed, but a sticker had to be attached.

The LOGO was printed on the Star Wars dioramas because it can be used for other dioramas

All the "Star Wars" movies are labeled "Star Wars", but only the first IJ movie is labeled "Raiders of the lost ark".

Like I don't think we're getting any more sets at all, but I don't understand your reasoning here

[Mandalorianknight]

On 7/3/2023 at 11:47 AM, Big_Daddy said:

I'm not in the least interested in the new cinematic Indiana Jones deconstruction project but it's kinda sad that there won't be any sets. Just like KotCS it could have gotten us some nice vehicles at least.

Same. I wouldn't have bought any DoD (DuD) sets, but I wouldn't have complained if a wave of them was somehow what was required to get more than 3 sets for the original trilogy (or KotCS, I suppose, though personally I find it almost as bad as 5. At least it had the decency to start the character off in his classic adventures and end the film in a good place for the character, even if all the stuff in the middle is- in my opinion- really quite bad. DoD had an opportunity for a perfect end, teased it, did the worst possible next move after teasing it, and then ended with "hey remember ___?". I hate it so much.)

 

We are probably not getting any more indiana jones sets. Even if the three on shelves do remarkably well- which I haven't seen much on them selling either super well or poorly- I think the best we can hope for after DoD's commercial failure is to get a diorama or D2C every couple years, sort of like LOTR's supposedly getting.

[wesker]

10 hours ago, DrHenryJonesJr said:

I gave up hope that another diorama could have been planned when I saw that the Raiders tile was not printed, but a sticker had to be attached.

The LOGO was printed on the Star Wars dioramas because it can be used for other dioramas.

That could have just been a matter of utilizing the set's budget. The diorama still introduced two new printed elements. In this case it probably made more sense to give those prints to parts that are used multiple times throughout the build rather than wasting it on a single use quote and logo tile.

 

4 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said:

We are probably not getting any more indiana jones sets. Even if the three on shelves do remarkably well- which I haven't seen much on them selling either super well or poorly- I think the best we can hope for after DoD's commercial failure is to get a diorama or D2C every couple years, sort of like LOTR's supposedly getting.

I'm completely fine with just having the occasional diorama or D2C set going forward. At least the theme would still live on even if its in a limited capacity.

Had we gotten a full blown wave of sets based upon the new movie chances are it would've completely killed the theme off in its entirety.

[BrickBob Studpants]

Not sure what to think of the yearly D2C idea that has been proposed here. The market for that is completely untested, as Indy never had a single D2C set  Even 77015 is a regular retail set.

Still better than nothing, I guess. 

[brickbride]

1 hour ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

Not sure what to think of the yearly D2C idea that has been proposed here. The market for that is completely untested, as Indy never had a single D2C set  Even 77015 is a regular retail set.

Still better than nothing, I guess. 

Also, Indy isn't LotR. LotR is like the bestselling fantasy novel (well, trilogy) of all time, never even mind the movies and streaming series. I see Indy more along the lines of, say, the A-Team - something with it's beloved place in pop culture but nowhere near the universal appeal. And something that, again like the A-Team, hasn't aged all that well. Honestly  a D2C would surprise me.

[Clone OPatra]

Well I found the movie to be the worst type of bad - competent and coherent while dull, unengaging and mediocre.

But it got me thinking about in a LEGO context if a line of sets based on a flop movie has ever done well. We can all day LEGO dodged a bullet not making sets for it, despite there being some sequences in the film that would make good sets.

I can think of lines based on flops that we're pretty sure didn't do well (Lone Ranger, Prince of Persia), and lines based on box office hits that likely didn't do well (Angry Birds, both recent waves of Avatar sets which I see way marked down all over the place here). But I can't think of lines that likely did do well, based on box office flops.

Just wondering.

[PGBQW]

Just watched the movie with my dad (he made a joke at some point during the movie and some other dads in the theater laughed at it, so he had lots of fun).

Pretty unnecesary sequel if you ask me, but as far as unnecesary sequels go, at least it was sorta fun and has a couple good moments. Hated the end, @Mandalorianknight, I agree with you on that one.

Thought Mads Mikkelsen was, as usual, the best of the movie. He goes so unnecesarily hard on every single scene he's in, glad he had fun.

Regarding the lego sets: Honestly, I don't know what they could've done? Like every cool vehicle was full of nazi flags, so I doubt they'd qualify anyway? Maybe Antonio Banderas' boat? I don't know, I liked the movie (sorta), but I can't think of a single scene where I thought "Man, I really need to own this as a toy".

 

Anyway, since I know y'all love my derranged takes: This is, in my opinion, the third best Indiana Jones movie (that speaks more about how much I dislike two certain films than about this one, but alas).

 

[Clone OPatra]

1 hour ago, PGBQW said:

Regarding the lego sets: Honestly, I don't know what they could've done? Like every cool vehicle was full of nazi flags, so I doubt they'd qualify anyway? Maybe Antonio Banderas' boat? I don't know, I liked the movie (sorta), but I can't think of a single scene where I thought "Man, I really need to own this as a toy".

The tuk tuk chase and plane from the end both would've made good sets in LEGOs vehicle-loving wheelhouse. The plane wouldn't have even needed to be a spoiler set - just the plane and the characters. Archimedes' tomb would be a good playset at a variety of scales.

[brickbride]

8 hours ago, Clone OPatra said:

I can think of lines based on flops that we're pretty sure didn't do well (Lone Ranger, Prince of Persia), and lines based on box office hits that likely didn't do well (Angry Birds, both recent waves of Avatar sets which I see way marked down all over the place here).

Adding "Eternals" to the first category. The movie is the second-lowest grossing one in the MCU and the sets were marked down like everywhere. Also, "Fantastic Beasts".

Edited July 6, 2023 by brickbride

[Doddsino]

Yeah, Lego really dodged a bullet by not making sets for this awful movie.

I'm kind of amazed it got made to begin with. Unlike a Star Wars audience that universally is acclaimed by all ages, Indiana Jones hasn't achieved the same kind of treatment since at least the 90's. Most of the audience for this movie is going to be people in their 30's or older, because I doubt anyone who was introduced to the series through Crystal Skulls was going to be on board. And I say this as a hardcore Indiana Jones fan, most kids today do not care about Indiana Jones.

On top of that, the series never needed to come back after Crusade, which by far has the best ending for the character. Hardly anyone liked Crystal Skulls, and I've only heard mildly faint praise for this movie, one person told me this was better than Temple of Doom, which I immediately knew they weren't to be trusted with their opinion.

And as much as I love Harrison Ford, he's the problem with the franchise. No one wants to see an 80 year old Indiana Jones. When I was a kid, I WANTED to be Indiana Jones, I could care less about his character (this was why Crusade was my least favorite as a kid), I just wanted to be super adventure man. No kid is watching Dial of Destiny and envisioning themselves as an 80 year old man.

Still, I think there is a future for Lego Indy. I would love to see maybe a couple more sets targeted towards adults. I would love to see a high piece Pankot Palace in all it's glory, but I doubt that'll ever happen.

[Nylock]

I know a lot of people strongly dislike KOTCS, but I didn’t think it was bad and I loved the ending where he ends up with Marion (as he should) and the tease that his son has a bit of adventure in him as well (just like Indy and his father). So in that way, I thought thought the movie did a good job showing us what Indy’s legacy might be and where he ends up. Never thought we should or even would ever get a follow up. 
 

Knowing that this movie doesn’t actually enhance any of the characters (and their fates) but is just a pointless sequel is sad. Probably not gonna see it lol.

 

but the largest crime of this movie releasing is that lego didn’t go back and make a TLC set with the grail. Smh.

Edited July 6, 2023 by Nylock

[brickbride]

11 hours ago, Doddsino said:

one person told me this was better than Temple of Doom, which I immediately knew they weren't to be trusted with their opinion.

I haven't seen the new one, but wouldn't it pretty much have to be better than ToD? Like, it not being wildly racist and needlessly violent,  and it not having a super annoying sidekick character would be enough. What am I missing here? Is ToD somehow considered the high point of the franchise? I thought that was LC, Sean Connery and all, or possibly Raiders for introducing the character.

Edited July 7, 2023 by brickbride

[BrickBob Studpants]

Prefering DoD over ToD isn‘t exactly a hot take, as a LOT of people are inclined to do so

My personal order is LC, RotlA, DoD, KotCS, and ToD.

[sammy_zammy]

17 hours ago, Doddsino said:

because I doubt anyone who was introduced to the series through Crystal Skulls was going to be on board. And I say this as a hardcore Indiana Jones fan, most kids today do not care about Indiana Jones.

Hey!

I became interested in Indy when Crystal Skull released when I was a kid. Very much helped by the Lego theme.

Also, people who are kids now were not kids when Crystal Skull came out. The two have nothing to do with each other.

[Mandalorianknight]

8 hours ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

My personal order is LC, RotlA, DoD, KotCS, and ToD.

Now THAT is a hot take, putting one of the original three behind the almost universally despised ones.

I'd go RotLA, LC,    ToD,                     KotCS,                DoD, with the gaps between them corresponding to how much better/worse I think the film is than those around it. (So RotLA and LC are almost on par with eachother, ToD is a visible step below but still on their playing field, KotCS drops off entirely, and DoD somehow makes KotCS look good)

[PGBQW]

11 hours ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

Prefering DoD over ToD isn‘t exactly a hot take, as a LOT of people are inclined to do so

My personal order is LC, RotlA, DoD, KotCS, and ToD.

Oh my god, we have the exact same ranking. You're extremely based.

12 hours ago, brickbride said:

I haven't seen the new one, but wouldn't it pretty much have to be better than ToD? Like, it not being wildly racist and needlessly violent,  and it not having a super annoying sidekick character would be enough. What am I missing here? Is ToD somehow considered the high point of the franchise? I thought that was LC, Sean Connery and all, or possibly Raiders for introducing the character.

I'd argue Last Crusade and Raiders are both the best movie, each one for different reasons.

Crusade is, by far, the most fun of the saga (and it hash Shean Connery).

Raiders has pretty much most of the iconic scenes from the series, which really makes it stand out more.

A perfect duology of movies, if you ask me.

2 hours ago, Mandalorianknight said:

Now THAT is a hot take, putting one of the original three behind the almost universally despised ones.

I'll grant you the bridge scene is very cool and one of the most memorable things on the series (I'll throw in the hat roll as a bonus too), but other than that it's a very annoying movie.

I don't know how much of a hot take this is, but I do not like Short Round. He has a few moments I enjoy, but he's pretty annoying the rest of the movie.

The opening is the best part of the movie if you ask me.

[Mandalorianknight]

2 hours ago, PGBQW said:

I'll grant you the bridge scene is very cool and one of the most memorable things on the series (I'll throw in the hat roll as a bonus too), but other than that it's a very annoying movie.

I don't know how much of a hot take this is, but I do not like Short Round. He has a few moments I enjoy, but he's pretty annoying the rest of the movie.

The opening is the best part of the movie if you ask me.

I LOVE short round. He's the only kid character that I remember actually relating to as a kid (as opposed to child anakin in TPM, Ahsoka in early TCW, or any of the other billion characters),  and perhaps consequently, the only one I can tolerate as an adult. I love his mirroring of Indy in scenes, and how Indy clearly sees him as a sort of son. I wish he was in KotCS or DoD.

Willie Scott on the other hand is by far my least favorite part of the movie and I understand if you've rated it so low for her alone. She could have been replaced by a voicebox with an audio clip of a scream and it'd be the same thing.

2 hours ago, PGBQW said:

I'd argue Last Crusade and Raiders are both the best movie, each one for different reasons.

Crusade is, by far, the most fun of the saga (and it hash Shean Connery).

Raiders has pretty much most of the iconic scenes from the series, which really makes it stand out more.

A perfect duology of movies, if you ask me.

Now this I 100% agree with. I'll add in temple of doom, of course, to round out the trilogy.