SPOILERS: Indiana Jones 5 (Jun 30, 2023)

[erasure fan1]

You seem to trust misogynist you-tube Doomcock over the actual director of the film. I think that’s worth some introspection.

No, I've said I don't believe what doomcock says. I also don't believe Mangold is being upfront either. These are Hollywood studio people after all. He's already bending the truth in the article with the line I quoted.

I direct you to the list of 2023 blockbusters in my previous post and then invite you to enjoy the acidic complaints that will surround the release of The Marvels.

To be fair, the marvels will get a good dragging through the mud because Brie Larson is pretty insufferable, and not many fans like her.

As for Indy, Ford is done one way or the other and the character of Indy is done with him. Yes, the broad franchise will continue, headlined by Ravenwood or some other character “continuing the legacy.”

Yes, the franchise will continue, with a new person taking up the mantle. That's the point. No one thinks that this new person will be called Indiana Jones. The reason the prospect of a female taking up the mantle upsets people is that it seems they are ignoring the previous lore. No one wants Shia back in the roll. But enough time has passed in my eyes that you could just recast. You know, his son, who they hinted at the end of 4 would take up the mantle. Then Indy snatched the hat away. I'm rooting for this film if you go back and check my posts. My only point was, in no way would it be shocking if a female takes the mantle up at the end of the film. You know, like Rey did at the end of 9.

 

[Jedijax719]

People talking about making original characters that are female (or of a given race) need to remember something very unfortunate about Hollywood. NOBODY is making anything original lol. Studios don't behave like they did back in the 70's and 80's when it comes to taking risks with original ideas. A majority fail and they have to make SO much money in order to cut a profit and cost SO much studios just want to stick with familiar properties.

That said, there are a lot of streaming shows and movies with female leads or co-leads that are originals or first timers based on books. I would LOVE original works for the theaters, but I understand the state of theaters is just too risky sadly enough.

But I would be fine if the Indy series continued with a female lead. I think that may be the direction they go with the D+ series.

 

[Disney Irish]

No, I've said I don't believe what doomcock says. I also don't believe Mangold is being upfront either. These are Hollywood studio people after all. He's already bending the truth in the article with the line I quoted.

To be fair, the marvels will get a good dragging through the mud because Brie Larson is pretty insufferable, and not many fans like her.

Yes, the franchise will continue, with a new person taking up the mantle. That's the point. No one thinks that this new person will be called Indiana Jones. The reason the prospect of a female taking up the mantle upsets people is that it seems they are ignoring the previous lore. No one wants Shia back in the roll. But enough time has passed in my eyes that you could just recast. You know, his son, who they hinted at the end of 4 would take up the mantle. Then Indy snatched the hat away. I'm rooting for this film if you go back and check my posts. My only point was, in no way would it be shocking if a female takes the mantle up at the end of the film. You know, like Rey did at the end of 9.

Why can't there be a female archaeologist that becomes the new lead in a new show that is in the same universe as Indy?

Hear me out:

Why can't Indy retire (so Ford doesn't have to play the role anymore as he said he was done after this movie), teach full time or be some curator overseeing the acquisition of antiquities like Marcus Brody. And a new female lead show continues the franchise without having the name Indiana Jones. So you keep and honor the lore of the past, and continue with new lore with new characters going forward.

This idea that no female can lead any film or tv show in the Indy universe is ridiculous.

 

[Phroobar]

I'm alright with female leads if it's organic. Like Ellen Ripley in Alien.

But what Disney and the rest of Hollywood has done lately hasn't been. They are just taking already established male franchises and making them female. See Ghostbusters 2016.

Or taking a previous strong female type, making her gay just to check off a box. See Willow series.

 

[CaptainMickey]

It's kind of like re-doing all the classic Disney Princess movies with men. You would say what? why? That's dumb. Those are iconic classic female characters and stories. Not that everyone hates men if they don't think that sounds cool.

 

[erasure fan1]

I think Mangold may have had you in mind with his tweet.

Yea, that's fine. You can read into it how you want. I've been pretty positive on this trailer hoping the movie is good. I'd say I'm being more open minded than you. I can at least admit there's a chance this goes sideway. Especially with Kennedys track record. Do I want it to fail? No, I've loved the character since I was a kid.

Why can't there be a female archaeologist that becomes the new lead in a new show that is in the same universe as Indy?

Hear me out:

Why can't Indy retire (so Ford doesn't have to play the role anymore as he said he was done after this movie), teach full time or be some curator overseeing the acquisition of antiquities like Marcus Brody. And a new female lead show continues the franchise without having the name Indiana Jones. So you keep and honor the lore of the past, and continue with new lore with new characters going forward.

This idea that no female can lead any film or tv show in the Indy universe is ridiculous.

Here's the thing. That's a fine scenario, and could make a lot of sense. My question is why won't they come out and say that? Their trailer could have dispelled all the noise. I think the movie gets a lot of the same criticism if it was his son taking over as well. You know what would have worked best? One last pure Ford Indiana Jones film with him walking into the sunset. Then you recast for a younger Indy. Something after the age of the young Indy series but before the films. Problem solved. People really don't want a knock off Indy. We have plenty of those. Tomb raider, uncharted, the mummy, national treasure... We just want Indy.

 

[Disney Irish]

Then you recast for a younger Indy.

Yeah like that worked out so well for Solo....

You might be in the minority, but the same fans that don't want to see a female lead take over the franchise aren't going to want a recast either.

As you said "We just want Indy", except that gets taken to the extreme of, "We only want Harrison as Indy" or "You ruined Indy with this new actor".

There is nothing wrong with loving a character, but that character is played by a real person who ages out of the role. You can't have Harrison playing the role forever. And recasts just don't appear to work with the majority of the fans. So either the franchises end, which isn't something that is likely to happen, or you end up moving the franchise away from the main character. And that appears to be what is happening.

 

[spacemt354]

Why can't there be a female archaeologist that becomes the new lead in a new show that is in the same universe as Indy?

Hear me out:

Why can't Indy retire (so Ford doesn't have to play the role anymore as he said he was done after this movie), teach full time or be some curator overseeing the acquisition of antiquities like Marcus Brody. And a new female lead show continues the franchise without having the name Indiana Jones. So you keep and honor the lore of the past, and continue with new lore with new characters going forward.

This idea that no female can lead any film or tv show in the Indy universe is ridiculous.

The issue with that is the franchise is called 'Indiana Jones.'

In this scenario, it would be putting the female lead (not named Indy) in an impossible position because she will be compared to Indy since it's a continuation of the franchise, while also being accused of taking his place since she basically is. All of that just so Disney can market the film/show as a continuation of the 'Indy' franchise to its established audience.

 

[Disney Irish]

The issue with that is the franchise is called 'Indiana Jones.'

In this scenario, it would be putting the female lead (not named Indy) in an impossible position because she will be compared to Indy since it's a continuation of the franchise, while also being accused of taking his place since she basically is. All of that just so Disney can market the film/show as a continuation of the 'Indy' franchise to its established audience.

I get the point, however you don't know if the plan is this movie is the end of the "Indy saga" or not. They can continue on in the same universe without actually continuing the "Chronicles of Indiana Jones" saga. Meaning that its still building on the universe of the franchise without actually continuing the main character's saga.

 

[sedati]

“Raiders” can be the wider franchise.

 

[spacemt354]

I get the point, however you don't know if the plan is this movie is the end of the "Indy saga" or not. They can continue on in the same universe without actually continuing the "Chronicles of Indiana Jones" saga. Meaning that its still building on the universe of the franchise without actually continuing the main character's saga.

The universe of the Indiana Jones franchise doesn't exist without the main character. It's not like Star Wars.

It would be better to simply make a new franchise about an archeologist or explorer or anything else. A Mary Oceaneer franchise for example would be awesome.

The only logical reason to continue the franchise without the main character would be advertise based off the nostalgia for the main character, which is setting up to the new character for unneeded criticism.

 

[erasure fan1]

Yeah like that worked out so well for Solo....

And recasts just don't appear to work with the majority of the fans. So either the franchises end, which isn't something that is likely to happen, or you end up moving the franchise away from the main character.

But it can work. Solo isn't a great example because like every star wars movie, except ep8, was extremely troubled. While I don't think the movie was ever destined for a billion, it should have done a lot more. You need to be able to read the room. Something Disney is pretty terrible at. People weren't clamoring for a young Solo movie. It was never going to be a billion plus showing. Recasting one of the most iconic figures in cinema history, is a tall order. Fords played 2 of them.

Keep in mind, there are good examples of recasting younger that has worked really well. Star trek and xmen are two good examples. Heck, say what you want about the prequels, but Ewan is as beloved in star wars as ANY character. I'd even go as far to say it's already been successful in the Indy franchise. The young Indiana Jones tv show is very well liked among fans.

 

[erasure fan1]

The only logical reason to continue the franchise without the main character would be advertise based off the nostalgia for the main character, which is setting up to the new character for unneeded criticism.

I agree. Disney knows they don't have the creative chops to create their own ip. It's why we see all the live action animated remakes. It takes zero creative energy and generally makes decent returns. They will most likely never create a new ip again outside of an animated film. It's just easier to play off of the name of something well known. And to be fair, it's not just Disney who does this. Ghost busters 2016 anyone?

 

[Casper Gutman]

Yea, that's fine. You can read into it how you want. I've been pretty positive on this trailer hoping the movie is good. I'd say I'm being more open minded than you. I can at least admit there's a chance this goes sideway. Especially with Kennedys track record. Do I want it to fail? No, I've loved the character since I was a kid.

Here's the thing. That's a fine scenario, and could make a lot of sense. My question is why won't they come out and say that? Their trailer could have dispelled all the noise. I think the movie gets a lot of the same criticism if it was his son taking over as well. You know what would have worked best? One last pure Ford Indiana Jones film with him walking into the sunset. Then you recast for a younger Indy. Something after the age of the young Indy series but before the films. Problem solved. People really don't want a knock off Indy. We have plenty of those. Tomb raider, uncharted, the mummy, national treasure... We just want Indy.

Recasting Indy is MASSIVELY more disrespectful then having a new female character carry on his legacy (or going back and doing Ravenwood). Ford is Indy. When Ford is done, Indy is done, at least for the foreseeable future. And thats the way it should be.

 

[Casper Gutman]

But it can work. Solo isn't a great example because like every star wars movie, except ep8, was extremely troubled. While I don't think the movie was ever destined for a billion, it should have done a lot more. You need to be able to read the room. Something Disney is pretty terrible at. People weren't clamoring for a young Solo movie. It was never going to be a billion plus showing. Recasting one of the most iconic figures in cinema history, is a tall order. Fords played 2 of them.

Keep in mind, there are good examples of recasting younger that has worked really well. Star trek and xmen are two good examples. Heck, say what you want about the prequels, but Ewan is as beloved in star wars as ANY character. I'd even go as far to say it's already been successful in the Indy franchise. The young Indiana Jones tv show is very well liked among fans.

Recasting works well only when the character is bigger then the actor - hence why X-Men works (and why Tarantino grumbles, with some justification, that superhero cinema killed the film star). Ford is Indy. You can’t just recast with Chris Pratt (who I actually really like, but who needs to take some time between projects).

There IS aN Indiana franchise without Indy, because the tone, subject, and look of the films are so unique. None of the rip-off franchises being bandied about have come close to capturing the feel.

 

[erasure fan1]

Recasting Indy is MASSIVELY more disrespectful then having a new female character carry on his legacy (or going back and doing Ravenwood). Ford is Indy. When Ford is done, Indy is done, at least for the foreseeable future. And thats the way it should be.

You do realize they've already done it right? And it's pretty well liked among fans? I'm not sure what you are even arguing anymore. You say this, and that is really all the people saying they don't want Phoebe taking up the mantle want. Make a great Indy movie, and let him walk off into the sunset. The reason the whole anti female replacement comes up is, it's an obvious thing. Most everyone against it just wants Indy to be Indy. And you seem to agree, so why all the negativity to anyone saying a female is probably taking over?

 

[GimpYancIent]

But it can work. Solo isn't a great example because like every star wars movie, except ep8, was extremely troubled. While I don't think the movie was ever destined for a billion, it should have done a lot more. You need to be able to read the room. Something Disney is pretty terrible at. People weren't clamoring for a young Solo movie. It was never going to be a billion plus showing. Recasting one of the most iconic figures in cinema history, is a tall order. Fords played 2 of them.

Keep in mind, there are good examples of recasting younger that has worked really well. Star trek and xmen are two good examples. Heck, say what you want about the prequels, but Ewan is as beloved in star wars as ANY character. I'd even go as far to say it's already been successful in the Indy franchise. The young Indiana Jones tv show is very well liked among fans.

It would take creativity and imagination (something that seems to be lacking these days) but yes it could work. Interesting you mention Star Trek as an example, while the original crew became iconic and synonymous with the series, the story line was about the Star Ship Enterprise and its voyages. Any crew could be cast as the Enterprise in its different iterations performed different voyages.

 

[spacemt354]

Recasting Indy is MASSIVELY more disrespectful then having a new female character carry on his legacy (or going back and doing Ravenwood). Ford is Indy. When Ford is done, Indy is done, at least for the foreseeable future. And thats the way it should be.

The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles already re-cast Indiana Jones in the 90s. It's nostalgic sure to see Harrison Ford in the role, but if they have more stories to tell with the character of Indiana Jones, I'd prefer they re-cast and pursue the James Bond style of eclectic actors playing the titular role.

 

[Casper Gutman]

You do realize they've already done it right? And it's pretty well liked among fans? I'm not sure what you are even arguing anymore. You say this, and that is really all the people saying they don't want Phoebe taking up the mantle want. Make a great Indy movie, and let him walk off into the sunset. The reason the whole anti female replacement comes up is, it's an obvious thing. Most everyone against it just wants Indy to be Indy. And you seem to agree, so why all the negativity to anyone saying a female is probably taking over?

I’m not sure what is confusing you. Indy retires. Phoebe continues as a fun, skin-of-her-teeth, adventuring archaeologist in the same narrative universe. Maybe she wears the hat.

I think the confusion is that you and a lot of fans seem to see Phoebe continuing adventures in the Indy world as “replacing” Indy and some sort of deep insult to Indy and his fans. I think that’s hysterical culture war nonsense. The Indy films will continue to exist. Nothing is “replaced” or disrespected, just like Iron Heart or new Hawkeye didn’t “replace” anyone. If I misunderstand, I’d be eager to know how.

 

[_caleb]

My question is why won't they come out and say that? Their trailer could have dispelled all the noise.

I don’t think they make movie trailers to dispel internet rumors.