Indiana Jones and the Inevitable Reboot (2025)

SnakeSurprise said:

(aesthetically similar to Mad Men)

Click to expand...

I thought The Man from U.N.C.L.E did this well, audiences didn't.

Pale Horse said:

I thought The Man from U.N.C.L.E did this well, audiences didn't.

Click to expand...

Yes and no, I think that movie had other issues that kept audiences away that Bond wouldn't suffer from, but that's stuff for a different thread, prob.

SnakeSurprise said:

The 007 series needs to be rebooted to take place in the 50s/60s (aesthetically similar to Mad Men) during the cold war, and recapture the tone and spirit of the Fleming novels. Take place back then would also make the gadgetry all the more appealing and the like as they would stand out more and be more special...the cool factor would be back.

Click to expand...

Agree, but I don't think that's the way they will go. They will want to move the character "forward" into the future.

I genuinely disagree with this mindset, that a film's setting decides how 'modern' it is as an art form.

Something can be set in the middle ages and still be new or looking to the future. I think this stance on Bond is taking things too literally.
The Brosnan films went out of their way to be technologically cutting edge and they have not aged well ironically , outside of Goldeneye, for me anyway.

emtiem said:

and you'll never do period as well as the films which were actually made at that time.

Click to expand...

This is not true, as proven time and time again...

emtiem said:

We're getting off topic, but I think it would be a very bad idea to do Bond in period.

Click to expand...

True that, I do believe we can pick this up in the "Bond" threads, and someone can even create a Bond Culture war thread. Though I'd rather not much on the 2nd one, honestly.

emtiem said:

We're getting off topic, but I think it would be a very bad idea to do Bond in period. Not least as some of the films in the series were made then, and you'll never do period as well as the films which were actually made at that time. Keep moving forward, not back.

Click to expand...

2017 Atomic Blonde did 1989 Berlin perfectly.

Regarding rebooting Indy back to the 1920's and '30s, there aren't many alive that remember those years and few people study history so you can take liberties with that setting at this point.

Something I've noticed about actors today, especially leading men: they have such a contemporary look to them, it's hard to imagine them pretend to be someone in the 1930s, 40s, or really any time outside of ours. I don't know if it's artifice or what, but they lack the authenticity of Ford and his peers from the 70s through the 00s.

You look at someone like Glen Powell and he looks like he exists in no time outside of 2024. I feel the same way about Anya-Taylor Joy. Really good actress, and looked right at home in the 1600s in "The Witch". But fast forward ten years to today, and I don't find her convincing in any period setting.

I swear it’s the omnipresence of veneers.

Also, I think about older movies being made by the kind of people that went to war and had life experiences far beyond just the jobs they ended up doing. So you get actors/filmmakers who served, maybe had interests in lots of academic areas and brought that to the movies they made. Nowadays it can often feel like they’re made by nerds behind computers who make movies because they’ve seen a bunch of movies. Obviously this is stupid generalising but I think there’s some truth to it.

British Raider said:

I swear it’s the omnipresence of veneers.

Also, I think about older movies being made by the kind of people that went to war and had life experiences far beyond just the jobs they ended up doing. So you get actors/filmmakers who served, maybe had interests in lots of academic areas and brought that to the movies they made. Nowadays it can often feel like they’re made by nerds behind computers who make movies because they’ve seen a bunch of movies. Obviously this is stupid generalising but I think there’s some truth to it.

Click to expand...

Oh my god, it is the veneers.

With Harrison Ford being 82 years old, do you like another actor to portray Indiana Jones kinda like how 007 franchise replaces James Bond actors ?

I personally want at least one Indiana Jones movie with a new actor to see if they can pull it off.

In terms of story/setting, I prefer the movie to stay in 30s/40s. I prefer to get new villains instead of Nazis.

And I'm not a fan of getting another "old Indy" story since in my opinion, old Indy isn't suitable for action scenes.(And for me, action scenes are one of the main appeals of Indiana Jones franchise)

All these rumors of Rian Gosling coming to Star Wars have me thinking…

Not a bad choice for a new Indy,

Face_Melt said:

All these rumors of Rian Gosling coming to Star Wars have me thinking…

Click to expand...

And I like Ryan... They're just miking teats on a boar hog at this point. They need to create a vacuum. Not the kind that LC to KotCS was, but the kind that DoD to GC was. Just an amuse bouche of a hole, and stop trying to cherry pick an over saturated market. Unless of course the rumors include Ryan as a baddie.

This is a horrible idea, but might test-audience/market well: Qui Gon and Dooku, a one-off like Rogue One.

Ryan as a padawan Gon (but not forgotten) and Sascha Baron Cohen as Dooku. Give it to Neill Blomkamp. Make it less about effects and action and more about the push and pull of the force. The Force in Shadows (Gone Dooku, LOL) ~ not really with the tag

(but really that's for a different thread, if not a different forum)