Indiana Jones 5 to be made by new owners Disney?

MTV News wrote:

December 6, 2013

In a week filled with huge announcements and surprises, we're closing out the week on one of the biggest: Disney, which had previously bought Lucasfilm and the rights to "Star Wars," now also owns "Indiana Jones."Before you cry out that he belongs in a museum, please note that under the terms of the deal Paramount Pictures will retain distribution rights to the first four films, as well as an active participation in any future installments. However, any possible "Indiana Jones 5: The Return Of LaBeouf" would be distributed and marketed solely by Disney.This closely parallels the deal Disney set up after purchasing Marvel Studios, with Paramount slowly moving rights, distribution and marketing over to the Mouse. In fact, "Thor: The Dark World" was the first feature solely produced by Marvel Studios under the Disney banner after several joint features.Currently there are no active plans for a fifth "Indiana Jones" movie, though the title has been rumored for a while. Back around the release of "Kingdom of the Crystal Skull," the fourth "Indiana Jones" movie, George Lucas stated he had an idea for a fifth movie he had sold Director Steven Spielberg on. Mixed reaction may have played a part in the film never coming to fruition, though the worldwide box office ($783 million) certainly tells another story."Indiana Jones," like "Star Wars" before it, has featured heavily at Disney theme parks, so it was a natural fit for the property to move to Disney. And though there was no official announcement with the purchase, chances are Disney wouldn't have purchased "Indiana Jones" without some sort of plans for the movie series.

Thoughts? Any hope left for the Indy series? Is it now the years AND the mileage?

It's better left alone now ... Crystal Skull was mediocre, by the time those involved get around to making a 5th (if they do at all) Ford will be too old for the title role and I don't think there's any great audience desire to see LaBoeuf as 'Indy Junior'.

I say either give Ford a better send off or just recast him once and for all. I always felt that if Indy should continue it should go the way of Bond since that is how the character and series is based. Passing on the baton to Mutt Williams will not cut it, people want to see Indiana Jones. I always said if Indy continued into the 90s that Dennis Quaid would have been the ideal successor.

I say restart the franchise and cast Idris Elba as Indiana Jones  

Don't even say that in jest.... :-(

I'd go for one last film with Ford, make sure they top the previous film. Commercially speaking, they made stupid mistakes in the handling of Indy's son in the last film. First of all, they should have cast a far better potential action hero than Shia, and secondly the son's name should have been Indiana. That way, they could have gradually handed over the mantle from father to son across two films and enabled the future use of the Indiana Jones name when Ford leaves.

I thought Shia was fine in the role, and I never believed Lucas and Spielberg ever intended to have Mutt Williams branch out on his own adventures. That keeps getting brought up by many online, but I never saw any indication that it would happen. The film itself even makes it obvious that he's not going to be taking the mantle with the little joke at the end where he is about to put on the hat but Indy snatches it back.

That leaves us to either doing one more with Ford, just to end his run on a better note, or move on and recast. I'd vote for Josh Holloway, as he has the qualities that makes an ideal casting for Indy if you want to set the series back to the 30s/40s.

I'd like to see Ford don the hat one more time, although it is only based on the assumption it can only be better than the last - and maybe that's a bit nieve. If they reboot what trauma will they use to create the new Indy....Purvis and Wade could be chopperlifted in to completely miss the point perhaps??

To me, Harrison Ford is, was, and always will be Indiana Jones (just like Christopher Reeve will always be Superman), and the thought of using another actor makes me cringe. I agree that Crystal Skull was the weakest of the series and Ford should throw on that fedora one last time. My fear would be that by casting a younger actor to play Indy, the character would morph into something far from Indiana Jones, similar to the way "Casino Royale" Bond was more like Jason Bourne than James Bond.

The best possible actor tor the role:

http://deadline.com/2015/01/chris-pratt-indiana-jones-guardians-of-the-galaxy-disney-1201360637/


Pratt can do both action, some comedy, and has the ability to be the sort of anti-hero that Ford was in the series. He has a decent enough resemblance to Ford that you wouldn't need to "reboot" the series; just keep making new films set in the time period in which the original series was set. This casting is so perfect that I will be stunned if it actually happens. Pratt's probably the only one that could get me excited about this series again.

I'd be open to Pratt taking it. Rebooting would be pretty pointless, as the series is pretty episodic. Just set it in the 30s/40s and treat it like another adventure.

Presumably LaBoeuf is out of contention now he's gone batshit.

An alright article titled "Your Childhood Entertainment Is Not Sacred":
https://thedissolve.com/features/exposition/903-your-childhood-entertainment-is-not-sacred/

... because it isn't.

Couldn't care less about the Indy franchise, though. RAIDERS was the only entertaining one, but thin on story and characters. I go on about film music way too much around here, but I think it's safe to say that Williams' work was the only solid aspect of this series. I feel the same about STAR WARS. With many great composers, they're often handed film work that doesn't come close to the quality of their music. I'm sure Jerry Goldsmith would agree, despite seeming like a humble man.

Anyway, I don't think they should hire Pratt. Instead, they should hire a black or Hispanic actor, just to make the fanboys on Twitter piss their pants and start crying.

Control wrote:

Anyway, I don't think they should hire Pratt. Instead, they should hire a black or Hispanic actor, just to make the fanboys on Twitter piss their pants and start crying.

Mechad Brooks was just hired to play Jimmy Olsen in the new CW series SUPERGIRL. Would've been much more progressive if they'd hired him *AS* SUPERGIRL, but for right now I'm okay with the hire.

I do think the studio is listening to the Indy fans on this one, though, much like Warner listed to the fans and hired Christian Bale. Personally, I thought he'd be great as Indy after seeing Guardians of the Galaxy, and his new role in JURASSIC WORLD simply kicked the interest up a bit. Look at the picture below. If you MUST reboot the series, you could do a lot worse than hire Pratt:

I'd pay to see THAT:

I think he could take over from Ford without dishonoring the work that has gone before.

Control wrote:

An alright article titled "Your Childhood Entertainment Is Not Sacred":
https://thedissolve.com/features/exposition/903-your-childhood-entertainment-is-not-sacred/

... because it isn't.

Couldn't care less about the Indy franchise, though. RAIDERS was the only entertaining one, but thin on story and characters. I go on about film music way too much around here, but I think it's safe to say that Williams' work was the only solid aspect of this series. I feel the same about STAR WARS. With many great composers, they're often handed film work that doesn't come close to the quality of their music. I'm sure Jerry Goldsmith would agree, despite seeming like a humble man.

Anyway, I don't think they should hire Pratt. Instead, they should hire a black or Hispanic actor, just to make the fanboys on Twitter piss their pants and start crying.

Through childhood, I grew up with three different actors playing Batman within a decade. That pretty much taught me pretty quickly that they're roles that actors will play and there's nothing to stop other actors from playing the part. I can't understand why that never got through to so much of these man children. I admit to being against the recasting of STAR TREK, but I eventually grew to the idea and eventually found other reasons to be worried, like having hacks like Orci and Kurtzman write "scripts".

Makeshift Python wrote:

Control wrote:

An alright article titled "Your Childhood Entertainment Is Not Sacred":
https://thedissolve.com/features/exposition/903-your-childhood-entertainment-is-not-sacred/

... because it isn't.

Couldn't care less about the Indy franchise, though. RAIDERS was the only entertaining one, but thin on story and characters. I go on about film music way too much around here, but I think it's safe to say that Williams' work was the only solid aspect of this series. I feel the same about STAR WARS. With many great composers, they're often handed film work that doesn't come close to the quality of their music. I'm sure Jerry Goldsmith would agree, despite seeming like a humble man.

Anyway, I don't think they should hire Pratt. Instead, they should hire a black or Hispanic actor, just to make the fanboys on Twitter piss their pants and start crying.

Through childhood, I grew up with three different actors playing Batman within a decade. That pretty much taught me pretty quickly that they're roles that actors will play and there's nothing to stop other actors from playing the part. I can't understand why that never got through to so much of these man children. I admit to being against the recasting of STAR TREK, but I eventually grew to the idea and eventually found other reasons to be worried, like having hacks like Orci and Kurtzman write "scripts".

I became aware of Bond after Connery and Lazenby had already played the role; for me there was no idea that it could not, or would not, be played by different actors.

I don't believe Indiana Jones is so sacrosanct that he can't be played by someone else. In fact, the character was played as a younger character on both the tv series and in LAST CRUSADE, so technically mutliple actors have played the role.

Indy is a property that could be entertaining fans and earning money for Disney. You knew they weren't going to buy the property and then do nothing with it. If done properly, a re-cast can work.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of making another Indiana Jones film, for the moment I can't help but think there are enough franchises building or roaring ahead and it's the single one-off film that is most in need of some love.