Who will play Indy in Indiana Jones 5?

Started by queeq3 pages

Well, I DID see old Indy. In the tv series and in KOTCS... it all depends on what role they give him.

But it's not like Han Solo. I loved Ford in TFA, I really did. But they made him a) and old man/mentor like and b) he as always a secondary character. So they did well here...

And then there's the other thing: the time where the next Indy should take place in. The 60's? The 70's. I thought KOTCS was already pushing it.

Indy was made to star in a time before WWII. Spielberg and Lucas said that many times before the made KOTCS. Because they felt the world kinda lost its innocence after WWII... Although philosophically that's kinda nonsensical, I kinda got what they meant. His character was from a different era. The closer you get to the now, the more impossible his character gets.

Anyway, obviously it's gonna happen. I'll see it. Let's just hope it's better than KOTCS.

Agree to disagree, i guess.
You simply arent into the concept, as evidenced by your reasoning (that i addressed) in your last couple posts.

Originally posted by riv6672
I hated to read it. 😛

You have to admit it's true though.

Originally posted by riv6672
Agree to disagree, i guess.
You simply arent into the concept, as evidenced by your reasoning (that i addressed) in your last couple posts.

Huh? What does that mean? Apart from being condescending...

The concept is: archaeologist goes around to world to retrieve ancient artefact with mythical powers.

The question is: does that work with an old man in the lead? I think KOTCS shows it's dodgy at least. And now Ford is even older.

Maybe Ford will be like Sean Connary's role from Last Crusade?

Originally posted by Surtur
You have to admit it's true though.

Not at all. He's aged fine. Not all septuagenarians are going to look like Stallone.

Originally posted by queeq
Huh? What does that mean? Apart from being condescending...

It means you choose to ignore the fact that the things you said regarding Sean Connery (and by extension Harrison Ford in regards to this conversation) being a viable action star in his old age were straight up wrong.
So, while i may be condescending, you either cant or wont admit you were wrong about what you said.
I'm not saying saying your opinions are wrong, just that the "facts" you're basing those opinions on, are.

Originally posted by queeq
The concept is: archaeologist goes around to world to retrieve ancient artefact with mythical powers.

The question is: does that work with an old man in the lead? I think KOTCS shows it's dodgy at least. And now Ford is even older.


I disagree with your opinion. Thats all.
An old codger stuck in his ways, an anachronistic character in a movie? Works all the time.
From movies like 1976s The Shootist to 1986s Tough Guys.

I'm just going to leave it at that, because i'm obviously pissing you off, without trying, and i really dont want to start trying.

Originally posted by Kazenji
Maybe Ford will be like Sean Connary's role from Last Crusade?

Maybe. It was a variation in that in Crystal Skull, though he definitely still took the lead in the adventure.

Originally posted by riv6672
It means you choose to ignore the fact that the things you said regarding Sean Connery (and by extension Harrison Ford in regards to this conversation) being a viable action star in his old age were straight up wrong.
So, while i may be condescending, you either cant or wont admit you were wrong about what you said.
I'm not saying saying your opinions are wrong, just that the "facts" you're basing those opinions on, are.

Okay, let's talk facts then, mate. I doubt that will convince you, because if this is just about opinions , you don't care about other people's opinions very much.

The Rock - the main character was played by Nicholas Cage. Not by Sean Connery.

Entrapment - the main character was played by Catherine Zeta Jones. Not by Sean Connery

League of Extraordinary Gentlemen is an ensemble movie with the entire League as the main character.

In all of these movies Connery is a headlining major star to draw an audience (just like DeNiro in Meet the Parents) not the main character (just like DeNiro in Meet the Parents).

As I said before , the only comparible movie franchise starring Sean Connery is James Bond. THat's not opinion... THAT is fact.

Besides, Connery didn't do his own stunts...

Originally posted by riv6672

I disagree with your opinion. Thats all.
An old codger stuck in his ways, an anachronistic character in a movie? Works all the time.
From movies like 1976s The Shootist to 1986s Tough Guys.

Yeah, we had that. In KOTCS.

And don't forget Dirty Grandpa.

Okay, let's talk facts then mate

Too late, kid. Facts went out the window when you chose to ignore them just because they contradicted your opinion.

😂

Oh, you think you'e funny now.

I thought I'd just ignore the ignorant remarks about those movies you mentioned. But hey, now it's all in the open.

😮‍💨

Was it ever not cool?

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/5-Ancient-Artifacts-Indy-Could-Search-Indiana-Jones-5-118737.html

Interesting! 😄

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0QcyX9JWMMo

Fun! 😄

That Harrison Ford, i tell you. Irreplaceable. 😄

Originally posted by queeq
Oh, you think you'e funny now.

I thought I'd just ignore the ignorant remarks about those movies you mentioned. But hey, now it's all in the open.


I know i'm funny.

You have the market cornered on ignorant remarks thouhh...

You: Sean Connery didn't do any major stunt work AND he wasn't the main character in the movies you mentioned.

Me:

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQng4rV8ypQDPngFy1cnv38jhe_SzB88qiCmdVOko5j2GnsP07Q

http://m.movieposter.com/posters/archive/main/67/MPW-33593

http://www.gstatic.com/tv/thumb/movieposters/32277/p32277_p_v8_aa.jpg

You: NUH UH! Thats not true even though it is!

😆

Originally posted by riv6672
I know i'm funny.

Yeah, you know how funny people are who say that about themselves.

Showing pics of movie posters doesn't mean anything.

It does when they all give Sean Connery top billing, refuting your argument, and then you choose to ignore them.

Wikipedia:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rock_(film)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entrapment_(film)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_League_of_Extraordinary_Gentlemen_(film)

Imdb:

http://m.imdb.com/title/tt0117500/fullcredits/cast?ref_=m_tt_cl_sc

http://m.imdb.com/title/tt0137494/fullcredits/cast?ref_=m_tt_cl_sc

http://m.imdb.com/title/tt0311429/fullcredits/cast?ref_=m_ttfc_3

All give SC top billing. Making my point. A point you chose to ignore, then flat out call ignorant.
My point was only ever that an older actor can lead an action movie.
You seem hell bent on saying thats impossible.
Even if you have to do the internet equivalent of holding your breath and shaking your head.

If, as you infer, i'm not funny (though i am 😄 ), then, this exchange is hilarious, when all you had to say a few days back was something along the lines of "point taken", and gone on with your own take on the subject.
But, no, you dont seem to be that mature.

Me, i'm not mature.
But.
I know how to have a conversation.
And have fun with those who dont.

Top billing means they use him to draw an audience. He's not the main character. He outranks Zeta-Jones and Cage ins status as an actor and therefore he gets top billing.

If you start these kinds of silly arguments, you should at least know how the movie business works, immature person.

Now you're disagreeing with Hollywood. Nooice. 😆