Would a recast Indiana Jones movie work for you? (1 Viewer)

[David Coleman]

Hey, I do like the idea of passing the torch ala "Mask of Zorro"! Also you have to remember that Harrrison Ford WASN'T originally cast for the role. The role originally belonged to Tom Selleck but he had to bow out because he had just committed to MAGNUM PI!

 

[John Torrez]

Are you guys even sure Harrison Ford would still be able to do it? I mean he's almost 60!

 

[TheoGB]

I could handle it. The only actor I can think of who can do the right mix of bad guy and good guy would be Brad Pitt. I think he could do the role fine, personally.
Of course, I don't really think an Indy 4 is something I have much interest in. There was a time they could have done it but it's just too late now and that's a shame. Would have been good to bring together Connery and Ford again.
------------------
My band is @ http://www.mokita.net
My Novelty Coasters

 

[Mike Broadman]

Yeah, Ford is Indy, case closed. The role is built around him.
Besides, has there ever been a good part 4? Most sequels suck, second sequels are almost all awful (though I kind of liked Last Crusade). Once you get beyond that, you're in the realm of farce, like Friday the 13th, Revenge of the Nerds, and Hellraiser.

 

[Todd H]

I wasn't too sure he could do it until I saw "What Lies Beneath." That man is still in phenomenal shape! I think he could do it no problem.

 

[Wes Ray]

The only other person I could even begin to imagine as Indy would be Dennis Quaid. However, the role should not be re-cast. Ford is Indy.

 

[bill lopez]

If they can recast James Bond and make it work they can recast Indy. No problem.

 

[DaveF]

Nope, nope, nope.
Harrison Ford == Indiana Jones
If they do a 4th, it has to be with Ford.
But even if it is with Ford, if Indy 4 is to the Indy series what TPM was to the Star Wars series, I say quit while you're still ahead. All the more so, since Indy 3 was the equal to, or even better than, the original.
off topic...

King And I.

That's how I read that quote at first. I think I need more sleep, or fewer Disney movies

 

[Hubert]

Why does everyone have the idea that Ford can't do the role? Look at Connery. Even at his age he's still doing a lot of action. And Ford is much younger than him. Ford can do the role. They just need to decide if they're gonna do it.

 

[Brennan Hill]

The time period that Indiana Jones is in what makes Ford's age so problematic. It's not the same as Connery being cast in recent action movies because the time period of the movies is so central to the character, plot, and appeal of the movies. An Indiana Jones movie set during the mid to late 1960's would not work. It has to be in the 30's-40's to be a success in my opinion. So in order to accomplish that with Ford you'd have to throw any kind of realistic and believable age timeline out the window. That's not to say it couldn't be done, but he's 60 years old. Could we live with a 60 year old Indiana Jones in movie set during 1940's? Maybe, maybe not.

 

[Jeff Graebner]

If they can recast James Bond and make it work they can recast Indy. No problem.

I think the key difference is that the James Bond character didn't originate as a movie character. The overall persona of James Bond was established by Ian Fleming in numerous books, leaving room for the acceptance of varied interpretatios of the character on film. The books provided each new actor with a wealth of material to base his performance on. There was no need to use the work of the previous actors as a primary reference.
Indiana Jones, on the other hand, completely originated with Ford's performance in "Raiders of the Lost Ark". The basic traits and personality of the character were largely established by Ford. Any other actor trying to play the character would be pretty much forced to base his performance on Ford's. Ultimately, the actor would have little choice but to largely imitate Ford in the performance. That was really even pretty obvious in the younger versions portrayed by River Phoenix and Sean Patrick Flannery.
I really think that if Ford is no longer able to play the role, it is time to retire it.
-Jeff

 

[Jefferson Morris]

I would also choke on any other actor in the part, although I must say that I think good scriptwriting and directing is the key to keeping the franchise alive, and not any particular actor. Ford himself doesn't even feel like Indy in part three, as far as I'm concerned, and that's because of the too-jokey script.
If it had to be recast, I think Russell Crowe has some of the grizzled, no-nonsense quality that Ford had in the first one (think Gladiator, whether you're a fan or not). I suspect Clooney could also work, if he toughened his image a bit. And he's already got the grizzle.

All the more so, since Indy 3 was the equal to, or even better than, the original.

Good lord, man. Check yourself into a hospital immediately ;-)
I kid, of course, but I consider part 3 even weaker than the much-maligned part 2. Neither hold a candle to the original--the best adventure movie I've ever seen.
Whatever they do with any future Indy films, I just hope they don't turn it into a soap opera-ish cavalcade of relatives and sidekicks. For me, part of what makes the hero a hero is that he acts alone. Thus I can't stand sidekicks (whether it's Robin, Short Round, or even Sean Connery--it's a philosophical thing). Sure, Marion tagged along for a few things in Raiders, but for the most part, Indy acted alone. And that's as it should be.
Provided they start pretty soon, I for one think Ford could still handle the physical rigors of the part, with some judicious stunt doubling. (Check out What Lies Beneath--I wish I looked that good with my shirt off, and I'm about half Ford's age).
My only request would be no sidekicks, fathers, brothers, mothers, sisters, therapists, pets, or anything else tagging along with the Fedora'ed One. If anyone can carry a movie sotto voce, it's Harrison-goddamn-Ford, for the love of Santa Claus.
--Jefferson Morris

 

[DaveF]

I think Russell Crowe has some of the grizzled, no-nonsense quality that Ford had in the first one

Crowe is too grumpy. I don't know if he give that underlying sarcastic wit and humor that Ford brings (and also showed well as Han Solo). Indy also got in over his head, and would acknowledge that. My sense of Crowes movies is that his characters won't show any sign of being out of their depth. Perhaps my memory is off, though.
But thinking about it, I agree that Clooney might pull off a decent Indy. He's shown much of the same grizzle, and sarcastic-wit.
Still, I say quit while you're ahead. Four has never made for a good movie, except with Star Trek

 

[Dan Hitchman]

If Indy IV was anything like The Phantom Menacing Script you'd hear my cry of rage and dispair all over the world!!
Lucas shouldn't even TOUCH or LOOK at the Indy IV script. Get Lawrence Kasdan and Gary Kurtz back from Raiders (I know the latter would be a cold day in Tucson for Lucas, but I can wish) and maybe the guys who wrote The Mask of Zorro for the screenplay. That was a pretty decent action/period movie with a bit of old tyme style and flair.
If they're going to do it, DO IT NOW for godsake!
Dan
P.S. I don't think Connery should be in this one. He slowed the pace and action down too much in The Last Crusade IMHO. Indy is a loaner and he only seems to get into trouble with tag-alongs.
------------------
Stop HDCP and 5C-- Your rights are at risk!

 

[Justin Doring]

No! No more Indiana Jones films, period! Leave well enough alone and don't damage a classic trilogy with a 15+ year later 4th part!
------------------
"Home is where the theater is!"

 

[Wayne Bundrick]

I recall reading that Spielberg, Lucas, and Ford had agreed that Indy 4 would be "all or nothing". Indy 4 will be directed by Spielberg, produced by Lucas, starring Ford as Indiana Jones, or else there will be no Indy 4.

 

[Tom-G]

For a brief moment I thought the title of this thread was "Would a RACIST Indiana Jones Movie Work For You?"

It's difficult to envisage someone other than Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones. Like others have said, characters like James Bond and Batman have had different actors, so this is no different. It would have to be someone who is little known or even unknown.
------------------
As for the bad rap about the characters--hey, I've seen space operas that put their emphasis on human personalities and relationships. They're called "Star Trek" movies. Give me transparent underwater cities and vast hollow senatorial spheres any day. --Roger Ebert on The Phantom Menace
AIM: Aureus91 / DVDs / ICQ: 58566493

 

[bill lopez]

People wake up! There have been many movie legend characters that have had more than one actor. Remember Dracula, Bela Lugusi & Chris Lee? Charlie Chan,Tarzan, Batman and most recent Hannibal was played by 2 actors one in MANHUNTER. James Bond should have been the one character that should have been imposiable to replace and the producers did it. And don't forget Tom Selleck was the original choice for Indy and they can always use him.
Next we'll be arguing that Harrison Ford is the greatest movie star of all-time!

 

[Jon Mercer]

Next we'll be arguing that Harrison Ford is the greatest movie star of all-time!

You mean he isn't?
------------------
Where the heck is Plucky? HERE DUCKY DUCKY DUCKY!!!
Magic armour is good but it tends to lose its magic without warning. Many an ancient lords last words had been " You can't kill me because I've got magic AARRGG!"
-Interesting Times-

 

[Jefferson Morris]

Still, I say quit while you're ahead. Four has never made for a good movie, except with Star Trek.

Gotta agree with you on that one. I still get nightmares about Alien Resurrection - and they have nothing to do with the suspense (or lack thereof) present in the movie.
I see where you're coming from with Crowe's grumpiness, but that doesn't bother me. For me, Indy in Raiders was a fundamentally serious guy, and the humor in the film came more from the dire situations he was put in than from any labored "light-hearted" moments (like the "Tapestries!" scene in part three). I think Crowe could definitely project the rugged, grim determination that characterized Indy when push came to shove (like during the truck chase in part one).
--Jefferson Morris