106 replies to this topic

[00Twelve]

Funny, the CR-based look. Well done, though!

[Stephenson]

Rocky has always been the underdog character, facing new obstacles each film that affect him on a personal level; the opponents were always just symbols of what he had to overcome personally. "Rocky Balboa" was not an exception, but rather a return to the style of story telling of the first two films (and the third and fifth if you really want to stretch things). This time the personal challenge was aging and it fit well within the story arc of the character. Nothing really new there, just a question if Sly could pull it off.

Bond and Indy on the other hand have always faced external challenges ("Nazi's - I hate those guys!") and have rarely delved into the soul searching that is part of the Rocky films. CR may be the (slight) exception, but it is still a young Bond starting his career, learning who he will become.

An older Indy, whether he is in his late fifties or early sixties, just has limited appeal to me for this reason: I find it hard to believe that Ford, as an actor, has the juice left to convince me he is fighting a truck load of bad guys, and I'm not terribly interested in watching him mentoring his son and/or contemplating the meaning of his life. Indy's about action (for me, anyway).

[HildebrandRarity]

Obviously some of you guys love the idea and some of us (yours truly) thinks it is a joke of an idea.

Never in the history of James Bond has a 65 year old (who has not had any kind of reasonable recent success) been brought out 15 or so years later to revive a character.

You guys want to bring up Roger Moore...but 1) he was NOT in his 60s, 2) Octopussy was a pretty successful offering on a worldwide level, and 3) no one is saying that AVTAK was a great movie (indeed, it's considered one of the 'jokes'/low points of the canon.)

And Indy Jones along with 007 and Star Wars is the "Holy Trinity" of movies? On what planet?

Lastly, just because a movie makes a fair amount of money, doesnt mean it's not rubbish. Look at Pirates Of The Carribean 2 or Da Vinci Code. Indy 4 may (*may*) make money...but that wont mean it was a movie to die for.

Edited by HildebrandRarity, 27 March 2007 - 02:14 PM.

[Mike00spy]

Obviously some of you guys love the idea and some of us (yours truly) thinks it is a joke of an idea.

Never in the history of James Bond has a 65 year old (who has not had any kind of reasonable recent success) been brought out 15 or so years later to revive a character.

You guys want to bring up Roger Moore...but 1) he was NOT in his 60s, 2) Octopussy was a pretty successful offering on a worldwide level, and 3) no one is saying that AVTAK was a great movie (indeed, it's considered one of the 'jokes'/low points of the canon.)

And Indy Jones along with 007 and Star Wars is the "Holy Trinity" of movies? On what planet?

Lastly, just because a movie makes a fair amount of money, doesnt mean it's not rubbish. Look at Pirates Of The Carribean 2 or Da Vinci Code. Indy 4 may (*may*) make money...but that wont mean it was a movie to die for.

Do you like Indiana Jones in general? Maybe not. But, if we can accept the fact that a 50 year old Roger Moore played Bond in his last 4 movies, but was still the same old bond, why is it hard to accept Indy 4 whose script is acknowledging this and being written with it in mind?

Then you claim the success of Octopussy worldwide vindicates Roger's age, then you say that since a movie makes tons of money that it doesn't mean it is not rubbish. Indy 4 will be a big hit, and how about we wait and see how the movie is before calling it a joke.

I seem to remember there being a lot of criticism of a Blond James Bond. . .

Edited by Mike00spy, 27 March 2007 - 02:46 PM.

[dodge]

Obviously some of you guys love the idea and some of us (yours truly) thinks it is a joke of an idea.

Never in the history of James Bond has a 65 year old (who has not had any kind of reasonable recent success) been brought out 15 or so years later to revive a character.

You guys want to bring up Roger Moore...but 1) he was NOT in his 60s, 2) Octopussy was a pretty successful offering on a worldwide level, and 3) no one is saying that AVTAK was a great movie (indeed, it's considered one of the 'jokes'/low points of the canon.)

And Indy Jones along with 007 and Star Wars is the "Holy Trinity" of movies? On what planet?

Lastly, just because a movie makes a fair amount of money, doesnt mean it's not rubbish. Look at Pirates Of The Carribean 2 or Da Vinci Code. Indy 4 may (*may*) make money...but that wont mean it was a movie to die for.

I remember Simon Cowelling as I left the theater after POTC2: 'Hideous! Dreadful! Appalling!' Naked greed at its worst. I remember walking out of TDVC, bleeding boredom through my eyes. Indy 4? Like many, I am hoping, hoping my instincts are wrong. Indy as the older mentor? Yes. Indy, in his late 50's (on screen), son to man in his seventies?
No one likes to bring up the problem of age. But, hope though I may, I can't see this one being anything but an embarrassment--even if it packs the theaters.

[Loomis]

Never in the history of James Bond has a 65 year old (who has not had any kind of reasonable recent success) been brought out 15 or so years later to revive a character.

So what?

You guys want to bring up Roger Moore...but 1) he was NOT in his 60s

He was damn near.

2) Octopussy was a pretty successful offering on a worldwide level

Proves our point, then.

3) no one is saying that AVTAK was a great movie (indeed, it's considered one of the 'jokes'/low points of the canon.)

By the same people who consider THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN and MOONRAKER to be jokes. While none of those films is FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE or CASINO ROYALE, they are all splendidly fun movies that should be enjoyed by any Bond fan, indeed by anyone who loves movies. IMO, at least.

And Indy Jones along with 007 and Star Wars is the "Holy Trinity" of movies? On what planet?

Indeed. I know someone (a very intelligent lawyer turned diplomat/multimillionaire financial guru, and therefore a guy who definitely has a brain) who views THE GODFATHER, INDIANA JONES and STAR WARS (alphabetical order) as constituting the movie series "Holy Trinity". This is his view in terms of quality, not of box office or longevity. He doesn't rate Bond at all. Funny old world, eh?

As you can probably tell, I don't give a stuff about Ford's age. I'm curious to see how they'll pull this film off, and I reckon you will be too. So will most everyone on earth who's in any way into movies. We'll all be Indy Jones' bitch in the summer of 2008. What's important is whether it turns out to be a decent film - the age of its star has no bearing on squat.

[Harmsway]

What's important is whether it turns out to be a decent film - the age of its star has no bearing on squat.

Yup. And hopefully it will be. It's Indiana Jones for crying out loud - one of the flagship franchises! Who doesn't want this film to succeed, even if they are skeptical?

And, as for most of the cynics, as soon as a trailer comes out with the Raiders March in the background, they'll buy it hook, line, and sinker. The skeptics will still be there, but they'll be pulled more and more to the juggernaut that is INDIANA JONES IV (supposedly INDIANA JONES AND THE CITY OF THE GODS at this point). They'll also be in for DVD sales, even if it isn't good. After all, most of the internet fanboy world are also completists.

And on that note, I'll be interested to see how Ford looks come June. He's supposedly working his butt off to get in shape for the role.

[Stephenson]

One important difference to point out is the fact that Moore aged in the role, making a Bond in his late fifties easier to accept. In Rocky V, the character was already showing signs of wear and tear that come with aging and a hard lifestyle. The transition just wasn't that shocking in either case.

Jones will be jumping from a character who was in his physical prime in his last adventure to a hero in his late fifties, which is much more difficult. As for the age of the star having no bearing on the success, I completely disagree in this case: Ford's ability to handle the action and the comebacks is essential to the success, and that has a lot to do with his age.

I'm not sure Jones really is as popular as Bond and/or Rocky (it hurts to say that, but I have to be realistic). Yes, DVD sales are important, but we can't completely count out television, and its difficult (at least where I live) to go through the channels without stumbling across a Bond film or a Rocky film (or both on Sunday). They've definitely had more continuous exposure than Indiana Jones.

I am hoping its great and a worthy addition to the series, but I have my doubts.

Edited by Stephenson, 27 March 2007 - 05:26 PM.

[Harmsway]

One important difference to point out is the fact that Moore aged in the role, making a Bond in his late fifties easier to accept. In Rocky V, the character was already showing signs of wear and tear that come with aging and a hard lifestyle. The transition just wasn't that shocking in either case.

Fair enough, though I don't think it's going to be that big of a deal.

I'm not sure Jones really is as popular as Bond and/or Rocky (it hurts to say that, but I have to be realistic).

Maybe not as popular as the former, but as popular as the latter? You bet. I daresay Indiana Jones is greatly more popular than Rocky. Rocky's never been a B.O. titan, nor has he managed to connect with the people who didn't really grow up with the films. Indiana Jones is a legend, really, and kids are still introduced to those films all the time.

It was a similar gap between RETURN OF THE JEDI and THE PHANTOM MENACE, and the STAR WARS films were barely ever shown on TV. But guess what? Come May 1999, everyone and their mother was in line to see THE PHANTOM MENACE.

Yes, DVD sales are important, but we can't completely count out television, and its difficult (at least where I live) to go through the channels without stumbling across a Bond film or a Rocky film (or both on Sunday).

Doesn't mean much, though. Rocky may be getting shown on TV, but it doesn't mean many people are watching. Especially the younger generation, which certainly has a bigger tie to Indy than it does to Rocky.

[LadySylvia]

I will go ahead and agree with all your choices there except the Dan Brown. I don't remember Da Vinci Code doing as well as they'd hoped. Did it even break $100 million?

Yes, it did. THE DaVINCI CODE's worldwide box office turned out to be $758,239,851. It outperformed even CASINO ROYALE.


As for BOND 22, production is not scheduled to start in another ten months. If they don't have a script in another six months, then I would start worrying.

[00Twelve]

I meant $100 million in the states. And I'm still wondering.

[Royal Dalton]

It was a similar gap between RETURN OF THE JEDI and THE PHANTOM MENACE, and the STAR WARS films were barely ever shown on TV. But guess what? Come May 1999, everyone and their mother was in line to see THE PHANTOM MENACE.

It still sucked, though.

[Harmsway]

It was a similar gap between RETURN OF THE JEDI and THE PHANTOM MENACE, and the STAR WARS films were barely ever shown on TV. But guess what? Come May 1999, everyone and their mother was in line to see THE PHANTOM MENACE.

It still sucked, though.

Of course. It's dreadful. But we're talking about financial success. And even with EPISODE I's awfulness, EP. II and III managed to be huge smashes, too. So much for a 17-year-old franchise being too old to be successful.

I imagine, though, since Spielberg's involved and Lucas didn't write the script for INDY IV, we're looking at something significantly better than those misfires.

I meant $100 million in the states. And I'm still wondering.

In the US of A, DVC grossed $217,536,138. I can't explain why (it was so mind-numbingly dull), but it did.

[Loomis]

Jones will be jumping from a character who was in his physical prime in his last adventure

Was he? Ford was pushing 50 in 1989, and looked it. Anyhow, one of Indy's most iconic moments depended on his doing the very reverse of what you might expect someone in his prime to do. I refer to his decision in the first film to just shoot the swordsman rather than engage him in combat.

I'm not sure Jones really is as popular as Bond and/or Rocky (it hurts to say that, but I have to be realistic).

He's demonstrably far more popular than Rocky ever was, and I'm not sure that a Bond film has ever outgrossed an Indy film (may be wrong, though).

[LadySylvia]

It was a similar gap between RETURN OF THE JEDI and THE PHANTOM MENACE, and the STAR WARS films were barely ever shown on TV. But guess what? Come May 1999, everyone and their mother was in line to see THE PHANTOM MENACE.

It still sucked, though.

Your opinion, not mine.

[Stephenson]

Jones will be jumping from a character who was in his physical prime in his last adventure

Was he? Ford was pushing 50 in 1989, and looked it. Anyhow, one of Indy's most iconic moments depended on his doing the very reverse of what you might expect someone in his prime to do. I refer to his decision in the first film to just shoot the swordsman rather than engage him in combat.

I'm not sure Jones really is as popular as Bond and/or Rocky (it hurts to say that, but I have to be realistic).

He's demonstrably far more popular than Rocky ever was, and I'm not sure that a Bond film has ever outgrossed an Indy film (may be wrong, though).

That iconic moment had nothing to do with his ability to beat the swordsman. As I'm sure you know, that was the joke. And one moment, iconic as it was, does not change the fact that he spent most of that movie and the next two beating the hell out of bad guys (and taking more than a few punches himself). As for him "looking it" that will always be a matter of opinion; personally I didn't see a huge change in his appearance over the course of the films. Certainly nothing as dramatic as what we are going to see. Just because the Indy is supposed to be in his fifties doesn't mean that I, personally, am necessarily interested in seeing a fifty plus Indy. Ford as an actor just doesn't interest me that much anymore.

Isn't also possible that one of the reasons why the Star Wars prequels were such a success is because they were set in a universe people loved, were filled with special effects and starred younger actors, rather than an ageing Ford, Hammill or Fisher?

I am truly curious as to how people are coming to the objective conclusion that "today, Indy is more popular than ..." whoever. DVD sales? Game sales? Surveys of public awareness? Number of websites dedicated to the character? A lot of definitive statements being thrown around ....

Edited by Stephenson, 27 March 2007 - 07:59 PM.

[Harmsway]

Just because the Indy is supposed to be in his fifties doesn't mean that I, personally, am necessarily interested in seeing a fifty plus Indy. Ford as an actor just doesn't interest me that much anymore.

Well, Ford doesn't interest me as an actor, period. But I'm interested enough in seeing him reprise Indiana Jones. Successful or not, I'll show up to find out.

I am truly curious as to how people are coming to the objective conclusion that "today, Indy is more popular than ..." whoever.

Subjective experience. Admittedly, it's very subjective, but it's the only way I have to gauge the waters. I've rarely met a person who hasn't seen the Indiana Jones films. I've frequently met people who haven't seen any of the Rocky films. And while I know plenty of kids and teenagers who love Indiana Jones, I've never met one who was carrying a flame for Rocky.

DVD sales? Game sales? Surveys of public awareness? Number of websites dedicated to the character? A lot of definitive statements being thrown around ....

Statistics are questionable in any sense for judging the waters. But I gather that the DVD sales of the Indiana Jones DVDs are much higher than the Rocky DVDs, and that Indiana Jones internet fandom is also larger than Rocky fandom (though someone involved with Rocky fandom will have to fill me in on the latter... I'm somewhat familiar with the extent of Indiana Jones internet fandom).

Furthermore, there's just buzz. ROCKY BALBOA gets announced, everyone groans in unison. INDIANA JONES IV gets announced, and suddenly the gossip can't flow fast enough. It's the talk of the town.

[Loomis]

That iconic moment had nothing to do with his ability to beat the swordsman. As I'm sure you know, that was the joke. And one moment, iconic as it was, does not change the fact that he spent most of that movie and the next two beating the hell out of bad guys (and taking more than a few punches himself).

My take on Indy has always been that, while he'll beat the hell out of bad guys and take more than a few punches, he'll look for another way out of the situation first. He's a very reluctant action hero, a far cry from Daniel Craig's James Bond, or Rambo.

As for him "looking it" that will always be a matter of opinion; personally I didn't see a huge change in his appearance over the course of the films. Certainly nothing as dramatic as what we are going to see.

Fair enough.

Just because the Indy is supposed to be in his fifties doesn't mean that I, personally, am necessarily interested in seeing a fifty plus Indy.

Why not, though? Isn't the quality of the film the important thing? Can't a film with a 60-year-old lead be good? What am I missing here?

I am truly curious as to how people are coming to the objective conclusion that "today, Indy is more popular than ..." whoever. DVD sales? Game sales? Surveys of public awareness? Number of websites dedicated to the character?

I'm going purely by box office grosses. However, the Indy Jones DVDs were probably the most eagerly-awaited DVDs of all time next to the STAR WARS ones. The world was never gagging for a Rocky box set in quite the same way (unfortunately).

Isn't also possible that one of the reasons why the Star Wars prequels were such a success is because they were set in a universe people loved, were filled with special effects and starred younger actors, rather than an ageing Ford, Hammill or Fisher?

The STAR WARS prequels were set in a universe people loved? News to me. I think the main problem was that they weren't! And, yes, I think an ageing Ford, Hamill and Fisher would have been just as popular as Jar Jar and co., perhaps even more so.

I gather that the DVD sales of the Indiana Jones DVDs are much higher than the Rocky DVDs, and that Indiana Jones internet fandom is also larger than Rocky fandom (though someone involved with Rocky fandom will have to fill me in on the latter... I'm somewhat familiar with the extent of Indiana Jones internet fandom).

As far as I'm aware, there are a couple of Rocky/Stallone fansites, with discussion boards that aren't especially active, and that's about it. I presume the same is true for Indy. As far as internet fandom goes, Bond surely dwarfs both Indy and Rocky (and is in turn dwarfed by STAR WARS), but I presume you wouldn't say that Bond is bigger than Indy, would you, Harmsway?

[HildebrandRarity]

2) Octopussy was a pretty successful offering on a worldwide level

Proves our point, then.

No it does not.

The context of my point alluded to the fact that Moore (at age 56) had just come off the heels of a world-wide success in Octopussy whereas Ford (who will be the ripe old age of 66 in 2008) has had what...um, Widowmaker? ... Hollywood Homicide? ... er, Firewall?

He he. Good point. A man 10 years older with no hit in nearly a decade. Very good point, Loomis my old friend!

;-)

Face it, it will be a joke...a 66 year old action hero. I would not want to embarrass myself and take my (then) 12 year old to see it for fear of being ridiculed to no end.

Edited by HildebrandRarity, 27 March 2007 - 08:35 PM.

[Harmsway]

And, yes, I think an ageing Ford, Hamill and Fisher would have been just as popular as Jar Jar and co., perhaps even more so.

Yup.

As far as internet fandom goes, Bond surely dwarfs both Indy and Rocky (and is in turn dwarfed by STAR WARS), but I presume you wouldn't say that Bond is bigger than Indy, would you, Harmsway?

Yeah, Bond has bigger fandom, if I had to guess. As far as which is "bigger," Bond sure has more mileage than Indy, but I don't know that I'd say he's bigger. Indy's capable of gaining much more buzz, hype, and anticipation than Bond ever could. A new Bond film is expected. A new Indiana Jones film is an event.

[Stephenson]

Good points all.

One factor I didn't consider was the presence of the Indiana Jones character at theme parks. With God knows how many millions passing through the gates every year, it can't be discounted. I guess I have also have to consider that Rocky has always been a character that held more appeal for adults.

Okay, so I concede that Indy is more popular than Rocky.

As to the quality of the film: the character of Indy is the film. Absolutely, a film starring a sixty year old actor or actress can be excellent. But a continuation film about a character who, the last time we saw him, could do the impossible and bounce back and do it all again, starring an actor who seems, IMHO, to have been on a downward slide for the last ten years? Yes, Indy was supposed to be an intellectual, and he certainly used his brains on occasion, but he was a fun, larger than life action-hero first and foremost, and one that certainly never hesitated to use his fists when needed. Can Ford today bring this character back, and if not, what is going to replace him? That's what I'm not sure of.

[Harmsway]

Face it, it will be a joke...a 66 year old action hero. I would not want to embarrass myself and take my (then) 12 year old to see it for fear of being ridiculed to no end.

If Sylvester Stallone could pull of ROCKY BALBOA (and Balboa's a *boxer*, not some old archeologist who's passable in a fight), Ford can certainly pull of INDY IV. How old was Sean Connery in LEAGUE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN? Terrible film, but ooooooooooold Sean Connery was as plausible as ever. And again, the character isn't going to be age 66 in INDY IV, he'll be set younger than that.

Furthermore, Ford's sort of "action hero" isn't a Rambo or James Bond or John McClane. He's more akin to comedic fight scenes, not ones of convincing intensity. If there was ever an action hero who was more suited to being aged-up and still maintain the spirit of that hero, it's Indiana Jones. You just know that at some point, Jones is going to encounter some effect of age during a fight scene, and he's gonna say, "I'm too old for this stuff." And you know what? That's right in line with the spirit of the character.

[HildebrandRarity]

What they'll need is a very good dose of CGI and up the ante on the supernatural elements.

That, or a young co-star along the lines of Toby McGuire/Elijah Wood/Haden Christensen//Natalie Portman...not them, but someone of that ilk.

They'll need to do one of the above (preferably both) if they want to connect with the repeat viewer demographic.

Otherwise it will do only marginally better than Rocky Balboa and will likely get blown out of the water by Daniel Craig as James Bond.

We're guaranteed that Bond 22 won't be filled with ludicrous CGI and a 19 year old side kick...so Indy will need that otherwise it won't be able to go toe-to-toe with 007.

[00Twelve]

Agreeing with Harmsway, I think of Connery in Entrapment and The Rock, and he was a bad in both. Ford's got it.

[Harmsway]

What they'll need is a very good dose of CGI and up the ante on the supernatural elements.

Why to either? What about that will attract audiences? Surely you're not buying into the myth that CGI is what attracts audiences to a movie. I'd actually argue that an abundance of CGI and a younger sidekick would drive audiences away.

Agreeing with Harmsway, I think of Connery in Entrapment and The Rock, and he was a bad in both. Ford's got it.

Yeah. I mean, Ford's let himself go in the past few years. But wait till he shows up in June, fit and lean and with a fedora on his head. The internet will go wild.

[00Twelve]

Wow, we're so OT it's hilarious. Anyway, Ford seems like one of those actors who seems to be done with physical stuff, but will shock everyone and their mom when he roars back in great shape doing things we never thought he'd be doing anymore. (Famous last words.)

[Loomis]

The context of my point alluded to the fact that Moore (at age 56) had just come off the heels of a world-wide success in Octopussy whereas Ford (who will be the ripe old age of 66 in 2008) has had what...um, Widowmaker? ... Hollywood Homicide? ... er, Firewall?

Doesn't matter. He's a proven box office megawinner as Indiana Jones. Likewise, Stallone had many years of flop after flop and bomb after bomb before ROCKY BALBOA, but the masses had paid to see him as Balboa before and were happy to do so again.

[Stephenson]

My points in response:

1. Rocky, as character, has dealt with the same types of issues that were addressed in RB in previous films. It was part of the pattern of the series, and therefore (IMO) more plausible. Rocky has always been the underdog (as I previously stated) and this was no different, just a variation on the theme.

2. Stallone has aged better than Ford. I don't think that is entirely subjective: he just looks like he has taken better care of himself (even before RB).

3. I agree, Indy is no Rambo.

4. But the Indy films are very similar to many Bond films in terms of the fantasy aspects (hollowed out volcanoes? Evil madmen taking over the world?) and stunts, and McClane in terms of the reluctant hero aspect and the tough guy wisecracks. Of the three you mentioned, I actually think McClane could be aged up more effectively (and with less damage to the legacy of the franchise, such as it is) because the character exists in a more realistic world.

5. I can think of three Bond movies in which the fight scenes were convincingly intense. Other than those, it's mainly been Judo chops for 18 films.

6. Connery's characters in his recent films have no precedent in previous films. No one's going to look at League and say, "Wow, Quartermaine sure got old!". Now, maybe if Connery was cast as Bond again ...

7. It makes no difference how old Indy is going to be (I sincerely doubt there'll even be a mention of an exact age): the film could say Indy is only forty-nine, but Ford needs to sell it. My point is Ford's age and if he can still pull it off. Given his recent work, I have reservations.

8. I don't want to hear Indy say anything about his age. The "mileage" line was enough, and it was never mentioned again.

I sincerely hope Ford knocks this out of the park and I love the film. But I don't think it's going to happen.

[Harmsway]

1. Rocky, as character, has dealt with the same types of issues that were addressed in RB in previous films. It was part of the pattern of the series, and therefore (IMO) more plausible. Rocky has always been the underdog (as I previously stated) and this was no different, just a variation on the theme.

Okay, so it's new territory for Indiana Jones. I can dig that. After all, if you're going to take the character out of mothballs, you better have some new angle on him.

2. Stallone has aged better than Ford. I don't think that is entirely subjective: he just looks like he has taken better care of himself (even before RB).

Agreed, Ford has let himself go (he's pretty overweight) and Stallone has openly had plastic surgery. But Ford is working hard to get himself in great shape for INDY IV, so we'll judge the look when we get there.

6. Connery's characters in his recent films have no precedent in previous films. No one's going to look at League and say, "Wow, Quartermaine sure got old!". Now, maybe if Connery was cast as Bond again ...

Well, there was NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN.

Sure, Connery wasn't that old there, but he looked pretty old (Connery, from DIAMONDS onwards, looked much older than his age). For the most part, I was fine with him in that film (I thought he looked better in NSNA than he did in DAF).

7. It makes no difference how old Indy is going to be (I sincerely doubt there'll even be a mention of an exact age): the film could say Indy is only forty-nine, but Ford needs to sell it. My point is Ford's age and if he can still pull it off. Given his recent work, I have reservations.

As with all the Indiana Jones films, we'll see a year date. LAST CRUSADE was set in 1939. I imagine INDY IV will be set in the 50s, but I don't know for sure.

8. I don't want to hear Indy say anything about his age. The "mileage" line was enough, and it was never mentioned again.

I wouldn't mind it, and David Koepp said that INDY IV acknowledges Indy's age (he said it would be ludicrous not to, and I agree). I don't know what age they're acknowledging, though.

I sincerely hope Ford knocks this out of the park and I love the film. But I don't think it's going to happen.

This brings us back to point A - you're still going to see it. Yes, you're skeptical as hell, and that's fine, but you're gonna end up seeing it. Just like audiences everywhere went back to see EP. II and III, even when they had no reason to believe it would be great. Skeptics will still see INDY IV.

[Stephenson]

Yep, if they're going to do this film they are going to need a new angle. If it has to be Indy aging, should they make it? Why not just leave well enough alone? I think we can all agree that whatever was going on around him in the various films, Indy as a character didn't really change. Why change him now?

Redundant questions, I know ... I guess I'm in one of those naive and idealistic moods.

Your right: of course I'll see (and I will probably be more excited when I see some footage, artwork, a teaser). I just want to like it as much as I liked the first three.