Jump to content

Indiana Jones reboot


ShadowDog
 Share

Recommended Posts

if only they'd not done KOTCS Pratt could be Indy jr.

 

OR...

 

The next fortune and glory Indy seeks is the fountain of youth and we get Ford for half the movie, and Pratt for the other half, and now the franchise continues with it being the "same" Indy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The more I think about it, the more I'm in. The opening of Guardians was a great view of what Indy would look like as a galactic treasure hunter instead of a Nazi fighting treasure hunter, Harrison was great in the role, but not so great that no one else could ever do it, and KOTCS, while I didn't hate it, it didn't leave the series as well as Last Crusade did, so I'm not as upset about it continuing.

 

This is WAY better news than another Ford movie at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
Guest El Chalupacabra

if only they'd not done KOTCS Pratt could be Indy jr.

 

OR...

 

The next fortune and glory Indy seeks is the fountain of youth and we get Ford for half the movie, and Pratt for the other half, and now the franchise continues with it being the "same" Indy.

I was just about going to say the same thing as far as Pratt should have been cast instead of Shia LaDoof, until I saw your reply here. If only that, and if KOTCS hadn't sucked ass, that is.

 

As for option #2....can't be done, or at least really hard to do and not be redundant, because they already had a similar concept in Last Crusade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest El Chalupacabra

 

You down?

 

What do you think about Chris Pratt as the new Indy?

About as much as the NuTrek reboot casting: whatever.

 

I doubt this is going to make a mark in cinema history in the manner of Raiders / Ford's performance.

 

 

Couldn't agree more. There are times when rebootings make sense (IE Road Warrior), and there are reboots should never be done. Ever. This is the latter. Rebooting major franchises (IE Star Trek, Indy, Terminator, Aliens), particularly those that practically everyone owns the DVDs of and has seen 20+ times, and especially with iconic actors that can't be replaced and whom the recast will always be compared to the original, is just a lazy cash grab. I can be down with well done spin offs or spiritual successors, but rebooting a movie like Indy is just something I can't get behind, even if it is done half-way decently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Star Trek is really a different animal, to me. There have been several incarnations of the franchise on both the small and big screen, for one. Then there's the fact that, due to the nature of the genre and plot, it allowed them to actually include Leonard Nimoy (a stamp not only of approval, but legitimacy) and, perhaps most importantly, forge ahead with their own stories and neither try to remake nor replace the original ones. They can all exist together in the same giant Trek family tree.

 

 

This, though? This is just wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am most assuredly not down with this...but I will see it if it gets made. :|

It's just too hard to see someone as else as the iconic Indy. I thought the same for the new Trek movies. They're okay action sci-fi movies but I still don't think they compare to the original cast.

Hollywood, how about a series of Uncharted movies starring Nathan Fillion?! There's your modern archeologist!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's certainly not something I'm clamoring for (right now, at least), but if Disney's going to do it, Pratt could be a good choice. He could certainly pull off the adventurous aspect of Indy, but I don't really associate him with the same kind of "knowing presence" that Indy has had so far. That's not to say he can't pull that off, though. I'm just so used to him in roles where he succeeds without knowing what's going on, that it's tough to see at the moment. That could change after Jurassic World, of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cola,

 

I adore Fillion like a good geek does, but I feel he's wrong for Drake of Uncharted. Fillion could be a good Sully however, Fillion is younger than Sully but not by much so have him play older. Drake needs someone like but not necessarily literally James Franco; mid-30s, dark, rogue, athletic, more intelligent than they let on. Franco could do it, dry, not as the caricature he often plays of his Pineapple Express role.

 

If we had a Delorean we could go back to the 90s and kidnap Dylan McDermott for the perfect Drake. Dylan as Drake is as perfect as Reeve as Superman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't agree with you there! To me, Fillion already is Drake in appearance. Add in that he's a good actor who could play the part really well and you have an Uncharted movie. Sides, he's not that much older now than Ford was when he did Raiders!

 

And McDermott...Ugh, no thank you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right about Harrison's age and Fillion's age in comparison to Harrison in Raiders. However Harrison looked less like a 40 year old and more like a 30 year old action hero. The 40 year old Fillion looks like he ate a 30 year old action hero.

 

Sully is essentially the old mirror of Drake so Fillion could play it flawlessly.

 

 

Grey him up a bit and it is gold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

That is Dylan now, younger he was a ringer both for look and type. Drake would require a younger man now of course.

Yeeeaaahhh, no way. You may as well get any suave looking dark-haired guy in a suit and get the same thing. :no:

Fillion doesn't just have the look, he has that...je ne sais quois that makes him a great fit. There's a reason why so many people have petitioned to get him the part!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest El Chalupacabra

Star Trek is really a different animal, to me. There have been several incarnations of the franchise on both the small and big screen, for one. Then there's the fact that, due to the nature of the genre and plot, it allowed them to actually include Leonard Nimoy (a stamp not only of approval, but legitimacy) and, perhaps most importantly, forge ahead with their own stories and neither try to remake nor replace the original ones. They can all exist together in the same giant Trek family tree.

 

 

This, though? This is just wrong.

I'd have agreed with you on Star Trek, had it not been for the unfortunate turn STID took.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.