Indy 5 - Shia To Take The Lead

[Ragingblues]

A recent interview with George Lucas has revealed what some of us have known (and others suspected) for quite a while..... Indy 5 (if it gets made) would feature Shia's character in the lead role, with Indy taking more of the supporting duties like Sean Connery did in Last Crusade.

www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,356282,00.html
(copy & paste link in browser, then scroll down for story)


Lucas: 'Indy 5' a Possibility

George Lucas tells me it’s more than a strong possibility there will be a fifth "Indiana Jones." He says that he and director Steven Spielberg have left the door open for a sequel to "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull."

Lucas, looking dandy with slicked-back gray and white hair in a snappy tuxedo, was a guest Thursday night at Paramount/DreamWorks’s party for "Kung Fu Panda" at the 61st Cannes Film Festival.

The swell event was set up on the pier across from the Carlton Hotel, where the studio spared no expense recreating sets and treating guests to haute Chinese cuisine. There was even one of the 40 pandas from the publicity stunt the day before, dancing in the crowd to Carl Carlton’s old hit "Kung Fu Fighting."

Lucas had a lot to say about the new "Indy" and its future.

"I haven’t even told Steven or Harrison this," he said. "But I have an idea to make Shia [LeBeouf] the lead character next time and have Harrison [Ford] come back like Sean Connery did in the last movie. I can see it working out.

"And it’s not like Harrison is even old. I mean, he’s 65 and he did everything in this movie. The old chemistry is there, and it’s not like he’s an old man. He’s incredibly agile; he looks even better than he did 20 years ago, if you ask me."

Lucas says he’s not concerned about early mixed buzz on "Crystal Skull."

"This movie is the exact same experience as the other three were. The difference is, the novelty of discovery is gone. I get worried when I hear fans say they’re expecting something different that will change their lives. This is 'Indiana Jones' just as you remember him."

But that’s exactly the gamble Spielberg and Lucas took with reviving their icon. Expectation grows into a frenzy and then no one in that frame of mind can be satisfied.

You already can see this with "Sex and the City: The Movie" and it hasn't even opened everywhere. Fans and even some critics want some transcendent experience. They almost seem upset that all they got was … "Sex and the City."

Lucas has been here before, when he revived and extended the "Star Wars" series. The build-up to the release of the fourth installment (aka now Chapter 1), "Phantom Menace," was huge until it reached a fever pitch. Then, almost before it could be absorbed, "Phantom Menace" became the target of scorn from fanatics. Computer-generated character Jar Jar Binks was public enemy No. 1.

But "Star Wars" continues to thrive. In August, Lucas says, he’s releasing an animated 90-minute "Star Wars" movie to theaters via Warner Bros. called "Clone Wars." It will be followed in September by an animated series on the Cartoon Network and TNT.

"No one wanted it," he told me. "Every studio rejected it, including Fox, and I’m very loyal to them. They have right of first refusal. Eventually I brought it to Warners. It’s the first time that three components of the studio have acted together. It’s very exciting.

"But the story is that everyone said, 'No one gets this. It’s just … 'Star Wars.'' I said, 'That’s right, It’s just 'Star Wars.' Just like this is … 'Indiana Jones.''"

Oh, yes, and by the way: If "Crystal Skull" breaks records when it opens on May 22, Lucas could wind up having his name on a fourth title in the all-time box office top 10 (it would be Spielberg’s second).

"But these movies — the 'Indiana Jones' ones — were never big hits right away. They were always slow starters that built up to big numbers," Lucas insisted.

I don’t think that will be the case with this one. And the notion that a sequel already is playing around in his head should only fuel the heady numbers about to be posted.


Ken

[Ramiel]

Yeah, sure, Indiana Jones without Indiana Jones...

[GCR]

Hmmm...comments forthcoming...I've got to mentally digest this.

[Kt. Templar]

No way. You cannot have an Indiana Jones movie with Indy as the sidekick that's just STUPID.

Spin him off if you like, have Indy guest star. But it has to be "Mutt Williams and the...", But I really can't see it.

[nickhorror]

F :-Xk you, George Lucas! Stop raping my childhood memories with your delusional ideas of what you think the fans want!

Attention Indy fans. I'm making it official right now. We are no longer gonna let Lucas do whatever the hell he wants to do because he made a movie THIRTY years ago that was pretty good. We've been letting him get away with it for ten years now because we've all been hoping that he'll do something amazing. I believe that it is quite clear that he won't simply because he is going senile with all that cash he's injected into his veins. Time to crack the whip.

[COWBOY]

Ken, your thoughts please....Will this movie be great or will it be bad?

[IndyNibs]

why the f :-Xk would you make an Indiana Jones movie and not have INDY as the lead character? That's complete crap! The Last Crusade wasn't called "Dr. Henry Jones Sr."

[GCR]

May 16, 2008 13:42:06 GMT -5 nickhorror said:

he made a movie THIRTY years ago that was pretty good...

Pretty good? ;D

I think Raiders was a bit better than just "pretty good"... ;D

I guess I'll withhold judgement on this decision until AFTER I see Indy 4. Who knows, maybe "Mutt" will be a great character worthy of his own adventures?

Yeah...I don't believe it either...

[Ragingblues]

May 16, 2008 13:50:46 GMT -5 COWBOY said:

Ken, your thoughts please....Will this movie be great or will it be bad?

Okay... here is my long answer to your short question.

My own personal opinion is that it depends on your age, or how seriously you are into the franchise. I relate this to Star Wars in that most folks like all 6 movies about the same. In the die hard fan category, it seems to be divided by age as to which trilogy is better. I can certainly understand someone being born in the last 15 years or so, being drawn more to the episodes 1, 2, & 3. The FX and action are far more kicked up as technology dictated, and it's the cast of characters they are growing up with. Most of the same group would agree that they like episodes 4, 5, & 6 too, but not as much since it seems older to them.

The same of course, is true in reverse for people alive when what was then the original Star Wars movies came out.... or those born shortly after. It's the group they know and love the most, because they grew up with them. The degree of how much they like or hate each trilogy will vary with how devoted they are to their favorite or how seriously they take the whole thing. If it's all just entertainment or something they enjoy on an average level, I would say most regular folks like them all about the same.

Turning to Indiana Jones, I believe the same will apply. There will be die hard fans that cannot stand the thought of handing the duties over to a younger guy for any reason. There will also be people of this generation that will be given a brand new reason to see the Indy movies, old and new. They can relate to a younger hero better and it's a movie or movies created in their era, which tends to draw more sentiment.

I believe the majority of the movie audience and fans of Indy would probably understand that Ford is now too old to keep making movies in a very unique and popular franchise. To keep the character and stories going requires a shift in formula and a young hero for new generations to love. Should they have made more movies between Last Crusade and now? Absolutely.

Perhaps this is a good way to keep Indy going and stay relevant to the movie audience. I think the world will decide if and Indy 5 with Mutt leading the expeditions is a great idea, by next weekend. I think Shia is a great actor with tons of potential and already giant box office receipts to back him up. If they write the stories well enough, it's certainly better than no Indiana Jones at all. I think Lucas would rather see his own franchise dominate the adventure genre it regenerated with Raiders, rather than let more Mummy or National Treasure movies take home the fortune and glory.


Oh yeah... don't believe that part in the story above, about Lucas not having told Spielberg or Ford this idea yet. They have known about this possibility from the moment the new script and cast had been agreed upon.


Ken

[alexp3000]

May 16, 2008 14:41:39 GMT -5 Ragingblues said:

There will also be people of this generation that will be given a brand new reason to see the Indy movies, old and new. They can relate to a younger hero better and it's a movie or movies created in their era, which tends to draw more sentiment.

ken, i am from "this generation" and if they come out with Indiana Jones 5 without Indy I will kill myself!!!!!
i don't care how good shia is he will never be Indy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Lucas is crazy. i will kill him first then kill myself

i agree with nick( even tho my childhood was not that long ago )

[GCR]

They're not making Indy 5 without Indy, they're making Indy 5 with Indy as a sidekick. Not necessarily the best idea in the history of ideas, but better than Indy 5 WITHOUT any Indy at all.

Certainly not bad enough to contemplate a murder / suicide, Alex! ;D

[IndyBlues]

I have a feeling old Uncle George, is planning on milking the 50's movies genre, and using "Mutt" as the springboard. I doubt Indy will be in the films much, if at all. Maybe he'll call in on the phone, like they used to do on "Three's Company", when Suzanne Sommers was going through contract disputes,.....but I digress.
'Blues

[nickhorror]

May 16, 2008 14:38:55 GMT -5 GCR said:

Pretty good? ;D

I think Raiders was a bit better than just "pretty good"... ;D

Griff, I wasn't talking about "Raiders." Sorry. I was talking about "Star Wars."

"Raiders" was VERY good.

[GCR]

May 16, 2008 16:16:23 GMT -5 nickhorror said:

May 16, 2008 14:38:55 GMT -5 GCR said:

Pretty good? ;D

I think Raiders was a bit better than just "pretty good"... ;D

Griff, I wasn't talking about "Raiders." Sorry. I was talking about "Star Wars."

"Raiders" was VERY good.

Ah...my mistake!

[alexp3000]

May 16, 2008 16:09:59 GMT -5 GCR said:

They're not making Indy 5 without Indy, they're making Indy 5 with Indy as a sidekick. Not necessarily the best idea in the history of ideas, but better than Indy 5 WITHOUT any Indy at all.

Certainly not bad enough to contemplate a murder / suicide, Alex! ;D

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
well......maybe in wont kill myself
but even if he comes out as a sidekick it would be as if he was not there. Indy has to be the hero!!!!!!! not some sidekick
still not ruling out murder tho ;D ;D

[Ragingblues]

May 16, 2008 15:42:29 GMT -5 alexp3000 said:

May 16, 2008 14:41:39 GMT -5 Ragingblues said:

There will also be people of this generation that will be given a brand new reason to see the Indy movies, old and new. They can relate to a younger hero better and it's a movie or movies created in their era, which tends to draw more sentiment.

ken, i am from "this generation" and if they come out with Indiana Jones 5 without Indy I will kill myself!!!!!
i don't care how good shia is he will never be Indy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Lucas is crazy. i will kill him first then kill myself

i agree with nick( even tho my childhood was not that long ago )

Alex, I'm glad GCR already brought it back up that Indy would indeed be in the movie, just in a lesser role like Connery was in LC. We don't need any untimely deaths related to a misunderstanding like that.

Plus, in my long winded opinion piece, I never said that everyone from a generation automatically feels more connected to the franchise of that era. It's just a very common thing that's all. I'm from the original Star Wars movie era and I happen to like all 6 movies the same.

Speaking of misunderstandings.... the very plot device of Three's Company.... that was one crazy reference IB! ;D ;D ;D

Would Marcus Brody be the equivalent of Mr. Roper in this analogy as well?

One other thing I neglected to mention before (could there be anything left? ), was the other possibilities for an Indy 5. Here are choices:

1. Indy in more of a side role with Mutt taking the lead.

2. Indy continues to take the lead with Mutt in tow (not likely given the age of Ford and the demographics of movie audiences I guess).

3. A new actor takes over as Indy in a reboot scenario, most likely between the Young Indy Chronicles and TOD, timeline wise.

4. They call it a day.... no Indy 5 or future movies at all.


Not that Lucas is taking requests, but I wonder what the overall vote would be among everyone that sees KOTCS next week.


Ken

[Kaplan]

"Mutt Williams and the Jumpers of the Lost Shark"

It's going to be like Happy Days, but the Jukebox shoots out poisonous darts! ;D

[GCR]

May 16, 2008 17:16:01 GMT -5 Kaplan said:

"Mutt Williams and the Jumpers of the Lost Shark"

It's going to be like Happy Days, but the Jukebox shoots out poisonous darts! ;D

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Ah...no amount of laughing emoticons can properly simulate how much I laughed my ass off right now... ;D

[GCR]

May 16, 2008 17:13:44 GMT -5 Ragingblues said:

Alex, I'm glad GCR already brought it back up that Indy would indeed be in the movie, just in a lesser role like Connery was in LC. We don't need any untimely deaths related to a misunderstanding like that.

Plus, in my long winded opinion piece, I never said that everyone from a generation automatically feels more connected to the franchise of that era. It's just a very common thing that's all. I'm from the original Star Wars movie era and I happen to like all 6 movies the same.

Speaking of misunderstandings.... the very plot device of Three's Company.... that was one crazy reference IB! ;D ;D ;D

Would Marcus Brody be the equivalent of Mr. Roper in this analogy as well?

One other thing I neglected to mention before (could there be anything left? ), was the other possibilities for an Indy 5. Here are choices:

1. Indy in more of a side role with Mutt taking the lead.

2. Indy continues to take the lead with Mutt in tow (not likely given the age of Ford and the demographics of movie audiences I guess).

3. A new actor takes over as Indy in a reboot scenario, most likely between the Young Indy Chronicles and TOD, timeline wise.

4. They call it a day.... no Indy 5 or future movies at all.


Not that Lucas is taking requests, but I wonder what the overall vote would be among everyone that sees KOTCS next week.


Ken

I think everyone should stop back in this thread (or maybe a new one should be created) after seeing KotCS next week, and we should have a real poll on this issue. As of right now, KotCS unseen, I'd vote for another Indy film with Ford in the lead (or maybe a sharing of the hero responsibilities...)

But if Indy 4 isn't what I'm hoping for, then I'd probably vote differently.

[Ragingblues]

I think that's a great idea GCR!

To be honest, most people here would probably choose either Ford in the lead role with Mutt along for the ride or simply to have this one be the last. However, if they do make another one (or more), that's where the voting would make more sense.


Ken

[GCR]

Ken...I love the new Avatar, man! ;D

[pitfallharry]

Gee......this is a total shock. I'm stunned. (insert rolling eyes smiley here)

Yeah, if things go well for CS you can look for "Indiana Jones Jr. and the _______" in the next few years.

[Desert Dweller]

Mother of god..I think I just threw up in my mouth a little.

I had my first taste of Lucas's tyranical b*llsh** when he reworked Star Wars and made Greedo shoot first, then also later on when they shot at the same time.

Stop d**king around with my childhood memories!!!!!

A poll is an excellent idea. I'll tell ya right now that I'd go with option 3: reboot franchise.(without Shia Leboof) or option 4: no more Indy films.
Ken was dead on about how they should've done a few after LC.
We can't turn back time now, but we can save the future. If Ford is relogated to a supporting role, it will be permanently burned into my mind. I'll have a tough time enjoying Raiders or the rest again, because I know how he ends up....as a freakin sidekick or supporting character/mentor. This is one of the reasons I hated the 90 year old man with the eye patch in the museum sooo much.

George Lucas needs to stop pooping on my fond memories with his "visions of creative drivel".

[nickhorror]

I don't mind if they continue the franchise with Shia...but don't dare call it "Indian Jones."

Starting a new franchise might just be the best way to go and I think that, right now, Shia is bigger than big and could pull it off--especially after "Transformers." BUT he'll have to pull a miracle out of his ass and make Mutt a classic character in this film (with only being a sidekick), because I don't think he can pull off a new branch if Mutt sucks.

[pitfallharry]

Personally, I'd like to see them end his current adventures with this new film IF Ford isn't going to be the lead of the next film.

If I was in charge I would go back and make a set of films before, in between and after the last three. Skipping around the late 20's, 30's and early 40's time line. They are plenty of ideas I could come up with....at least for another 3 films.

Yes, that would mean you'd have to recast Indy, but........Which is worse? Indy Jr. or just plain Indy fighting the Nazis and any other evil that crops up?

If they cast me I'd make d*mn sure we'd see the Raiders gear back on the big screen. ;D

Yeah, I know......not likely but fun to day dream about. ;D