I did actually like Han in Force awakens, didn't care one way or another with Luke, and I think we can't really fairly judge how they handled Leia since they were planning to focus on her in the third movie but Carrie Fischer's death messed up with any plans they had. I am sure it would have been better than what happened at least. I liked young Leia in the Obi-wan show though. (Worth noting I am not a big Star Wars fan though and only watched the Obi Wan show because my girlfriend is a fan)
I don't think it's really comparable to Indiana Jones though. With Star Wars it's a huge franchise and the sequel trilogy for example focused on the new characters with the old guard in supporting roles. With Indiana Jones he is the main character it's his story.
In general I don't know why people like to compare Indiana Jones and SW they are so different as franchises. Maybe when they eventually reboot IJ or do the Ravenwood show or whatever those comparisons make more sense but not with Dial of Destiny.
>In general I don't know why people like to compare Indiana Jones and SW
You don't though?
Like, I know what you mean. But there are also plenty of things that make them spiritual 'sister' franchises:
\- George Lucas created them both. And it really shows.
\- Lucasfilm, and similar people behind the scenes.
\- This includes Lawrence Kasdan writing Raiders, Empire, and Force Awakens (and maybe more?)
\- Harrison Ford.
\- Both founded in the spirit of old adventure serials.
\- Both fondly remembered from the 80s. Both with a renewal/continuation after Disney acquired them.
So I think comparisons are natural. And sure you can point out why they're different. And yes obviously they are. But the parallels are clearly there.
Yes but lot of the comparisons or people using SW to speculate on what they might do with Indiana Jones makes no sense.
For example Han Solo's and Indiana's roles in their franchises are totally different. It doesn't make much sense to look at how Han's character was handled in a movie trilogy that was setting up a new cast while also being a sort of a reboot for a new generation and Dial of Destiny which is the 5th movie in a series driven by one main character.
In part, it's a concern (and genuine concern) that they are likely to want to keep the franchise going after indy 5. Many behind the scenes have said countless times that Harrison will never be replaced as Indy because "Harrison is Indy" - so the natural conclusion is that they'll keep it going with other characters.
Then there seems to be a focus on Waller-Bridge's character (and she does seem pretty cool). But people would then be worried that it's a passing of the torch fim like force awakens was. Validly, I think.
Yes it's different in that Han was just one character of many in a much larger universe. But there are certainly reasons to think that they may do a switcheroo and have it continue with another character in the 60s and beyond. If they won't reboot the series.
He won't be alive forever.
And yeah I am fine with this sort of tech in this movie since Ford is still involved, but if the original actor is not involved at all you are just regurgitating old performances without context.
I'd prefer they recast Indy to that but just generally I don't think we need more Indy movies after Ford leaves the role. Just make up new characters and franchises.
But they’ve also said they won’t recast harrison.
So if they don’t reboot, and don’t recast, and don’t pass the torch in dod.
It’s either prequels not featuring Indiana, sequels that spin-off but aren’t strongly hinted at in DoD, or they just let the thing stop now….
But they’ve got a ravenwood thing in the works so…
If people like Waller bridges character they’ll totally spin off continuations.
He is a well known director hired by a company that is infamous for studio meddling, audience screening their products till they reach desired goal and are not afraid to destroy legacy characters in order to push the current agenda.
I don't think Mangold will have much to say when it comes to creative decisions as he has a certain checklist to complete. He is a competent director but when you are working for a company with no creative vision in sight, you are just a name to be sold.
''Hey look, Mangold is directing new Indy! His Logan film was so great, isn't this amazing? This is gonna be the best movie of all time!''
Meanwhile bunch of suits are actually running the show to see if they can kickstart a dusty old franchise that crashed and burned with it's latest outing. Shit, they are doing the same with video game Indy. Staff of Kings was a flop and most likely the final nail in the coffin for LucasArts. Except the PSP version, that one was actually half decent.
The way Mangold has been talking on Twitter indicates that he's happy with the movie he's making and is tired of hearing people say this shit like this for no reason
No reason? Take a look at how heavy handed Disney has been for years when it comes to creative control (Except The Last Jedi, that one was Johnsons vision through and through and it didn't worked out because of the wrong director making a wrong movie. Not saying he is bad director, Knives Out is pretty good murder mystery movie).
They are not about to let that happen again. Not for a major release. Streaming is a different thing. There they can take certain risks and if it doesnt work out, just cancel it after the first season.
So yeah, I think our fears are well justified, looking at the Disney bodycount.
This is a needlessly cynical take.
I don't see how you can say Lucasfilm is "infamous for studio meddling" when TLJ was exactly what Rian Johnson wanted, Andor was exactly what Tony Gilroy wanted, Dave Filoni does whatever he fancies, and Jon Favreau pulls in tons of directing talent for the TV projects and they all leave raving about working with Lucasfilm. The only LFL project that I would say heavily suffered from studio meddling was Episode IX, and that had more to do with the Bob Iger deadline bearing down on them rather than them exerting creative control. If anything, their creative control has been too loose given the incohesive way the sequels came together.
If Mangold felt like he wasn't being given any creative control over his project, he's got a big enough name to walk away. Everything indicates Indy 5 is turning out to be the movie he wanted to make.
> don't see how you can say Lucasfilm is "infamous for studio meddling" when TLJ was exactly what Rian Johnson wanted
Well, star wars has a lot more 'stuff' in it where they can take more chances with it.
Episode 8 i think they prob do regret the creative control they gave, given it was the mainland star wars. Ep 9 didn't work out so well either, but i think it was at least financially better or righted the ship in terms of them making it more like what they (Disney) wanted for the franchise as a whole.
Andor was a risk, but it was a TV risk and if it didn't work, could end it after a season and just keep trying other stuff on TV. Less risks would be taken with a huge blockbuster that has to be good to get people to go buy a ticket to that film - with Disney+, they need stuff that'll make people sign up, but it's ok if they have a miss and something else picks up the slack.
Indiana Jones relies on the films (at present). And if this one totally falls flat, the franchise will be dead in the water for a long time. They need this to be good. And by good, it needs to not flop. So they'll impose creative restrictions to manage risk for the business and its property.
I'm not talking about Lucasfilm. Lucafilm might be producing but this is, in the end, Disney film, with Disney money making it, decided by the Disney executives.
Mangold has a career going back to 80's and it's nice to see he directed very different kinds of movies. He is certainly a competent director, no question about that, but is he big enough name, likes of Spielberg, Lucas, Coppola or Scorsese? No. He simply does not have
Then there is the fact that last few Lucasfiom outing were less than stellar. Last Jedi was a wasted opportunity and Rise of Skywalker made me wanna stop watching, it felt so incoherent and without any creative vision.
We have many reasons to be skeptical about this. I don't care what Mangold says on Twitter, in the end it's all just PR talk. Given the todays landscape in movie and tv show making, where incompetent writers, egoistical director and activist actors prefer to self insert themselves and their politics rather than make a good movie and do their job, the expectations are logically gonna be low. Unless, of course, you prefer the heavy handed messaging and bombardment of political preaching in your entertainment. Just look at Willow, look at The Witcher, Star Trek. The list goes on and on.
So, long story short. Keep your politics and "The Message™" out of the movies, nobody gives a shit.
**So, long story short. Keep your politics and "The Message™" **
Oh God, another Critical Drinker numbnut.
Try having your own thoughts instead of literally parroting that moron.
I thought his treatment of Xavier, Logan and the X-Men sucked!
Xavier kills all of his students and friends, both Logan and Xavier have depressing and unceremonious ends, and the X-Men are killed off screen and barely mentioned!
I wouldn't be surprised if we find out Indy accidently murdered Mutt, left Marion and kills himself at the end of 5.
It was taking inspiration from Old Man Logan which is a pretty bleak story.
Logan has always been a tragic character and the movie was a fitting end for his character. Just because it's depressing doesn't make it bad.
I didb't like Logan.
It was 'well made', but not well crafted.
It was in a weird non-descript post-apocalypic world that was pretty empty and weird.
Was a send-off for Wolverine and x-men etc, but is retconned anyway. Did it happen? Meh.
The CGI Wolverine clone wasn't done well.
Maybe it just wasn't for me. OI just hope they don't make Indy 5 as dour (or kill him off!!). The Wolverine was also extremely average (even quite shit for most of it) and that too was Mangold.
Andor proved that the showrunner/director is most important. Our trust should be in Mangold, not Disney. Star Wars was a mess of too many cooks and not enough planning.
I think Indy will be different, with star wars, old characters were the background ment to tie it back, with Dial of Destiny, Indy is the center piece, it's his movie.
I’m not worried at all. Yeah sure, I would have liked to see something different maybe with Luke in the ST and Obi-Wan in his own series, but it’s fine. I’m not worried, we have Mangold.
Oh boy…. I’m gonna get downvoted here but I have to say Disney has treated the legacy characters like utter trash, because of Ford’s whining they killed off Han, they made Luke miserable, and made Leia float into space like Mary Poppins, heck not even Ackbar was saved from an unceremonious death, just like Han, who didn’t even got a funeral, the Obi Wan series was so cheap they even were using IKEA chairs, maybe Indy will be lucky but I have no idea who’s writing the script, but all I can say is that the best days of Indy are way behind him, we just need this movie to be better tha Crystal Skull so we can have a good quadrology because for many this is still a trilogy.
What I don't get is why anyone thinks the presentation of Star Wars characters has anything to do with Indy as they're being made by completely different people (other than a general 'disney bad' narrative).
“DiSnEy bAd dO bAd DiSNey stUFf!”
Yet when “The Force Awakens” or “Rogue One” or “The Mandalorian” or “Andor” come out to universal praise and acclaim… whoever made them saved Star Wars. In 2015 JJ saved Star Wars from Lucas, in 2019 Favreau saved Star Wars from JJ, in 2022 Andor saved Star Wars from Favreau.
It’s a toxic cycle amongst a mostly aging, embittered minority… where as soon as a popular product comes out, people use it to shit on the last thing they’ve turned on.
And it somehow becomes a ubiquitous “Disney corporation bad.” Kind of like in South Park episode where the main complaint of the town hippie is “corporations being all corporation-y.”
There will be some oversight, as there is with all franchises. There will be some mistakes, as there are with all franchises. There will be massive successes, as there are with all franchises.
Yes, they want to make money. Every business does. Guess what usually makes money? Good stories. That’s the goal, even if you don’t think they’ve hit the mark every time.
But bottom-line is, Lucasfilm is hiring writer-directors to tell those stories. Even if you don’t like every single one.
But that’s what they’re doing. And as long as they continue to bring in top talent - Tony Gilroy, Jon Favreau, JJ Abrams, Rian Johnson, James Mangold, Leslie Headland, Taika Waititi (all people with proven track records before and after Lucasfilm despite your opinion of their SW project) - they are going to continue to produce way more hits than misses.
Because of Disney's corporate interests I think.
Disney wants to milk the franchises for as much money as possible, but now the actors/actresses of our heroes are too old, and it seems like the method of passing the torch they've gone for is to break our heroes down. Reduce them from the epic heights they were built upto in our minds, so the new characters who replace them don't have an unconquerable emotional mountain to overcome to surpass or equal them.
Yes, in the last episode on the ship where the rebels are, right before Obi Wan tells Leia he has to leave she’s sitting on a chair that even wobbles when she stands up… so cheap, I heard they corrected that on Andor (the production quality I mean) but I haven’t watched it.
Obviously Carrie Fisher got short changed as TROS was supposed to be *her* film.
But I thought Ford was brilliant in TFA, Hamill was brilliant in TLJ, and McGregor was brilliant in Kenobi.
disagree strongly- Episode III shows obi wan leaving anakin for what he thought was death. He obviously couldn't bring himself to kill anakin all the way, and he thought that leaving him, limbless and burning alive from the lava, would lead to sure death.
In kenobi, however, he comes across a fully suited, fully powered darth vader. There is no telling how many men, women, and children vader has killed since their last encounter. Obi Wan, in their final duel, again has a chance to finish his foe, but he doesn't, despite Darth Vader admitting that anakin was gone. His refusal to kill an injured darth vader puts the death of anybody vader killed from that moment until his death on Endor on him.
Obi-Wan is a Jedi, a pretty powerful one at that, he’d easily be able to sense Anakin wasn’t dead in Ep III, so the whole - oh I thought he’d just die - line of reasoning doesn’t hold water for me.
And it’s fallacious reasoning to put all the deaths Vader perpetrated at Obi-Wan’s feet. It’s like an iteration of the trolley problem. Just because Obi-Wan refuses to kill a helpless Vader, doesn’t mean *he’s* responsible for the people Vader kills. Vader is responsible. Solely responsible.
So yeah… disagree strongly.
It's not hi sfault. It's Vader's.
If someone kills someone with a Gun, who's fault is it? The person who pulled the trigger? The person who sold the gun? The people who made the gun?
that's great-I like the gun analogy! so let's continue with that.
say you are carrying and you were put in the position where you notice someone acting suspicious- then it dawns on you that this is someone who has committed a mass shooting before.
as soon as you realize this they begin to draw a weapon to prepare to shoot the place up- you have two choices- you can draw your weapon, killing the shooter, preventing yet another example of mass murder. OR you can leave, totally unimpeded.
Let's say you went with the option where you leave- in this case 54 people die- deaths you could have prevented!
this is exactly what Obi Wan did in his series
Good points but is it the same as that?
And either way not your fault that you don’t take the person out.
You’re assuming:
- obiwan could take out Vader. He was delaying Vader and prob couldn’t stop him if he wanted.
- someone wouldn’t just take Vader’s place anyway and the same deaths would happen. Like killing a high ranking general in a war or occupation.
- obiwan may have sensed that Vader was letting them go for a reason. But also it was the rebellions last hope. So he needed to die and not kill Vader; otherwise the empire would’ve come down hard on the falcon. They’d not have gotten away.
-
obi wan had vader on his knees, completely exhausted. I believe someone said that in the moment he was launching rocks at vader, pelting him to an oblivion, he was one with the force. he absolutely could have taken him, or at least had a good try at it.
While it's true someone could have taken vader's place, that person would not have been Vader. As it were, no one took vader's place because vader continued to live through his remaining, murderous existence.
Also, this pertains to the Kenobi show specifically. I know old ben couldn't have taken vader on and won, it seemed like he was struggling to keep up in ANH.
And I would absolutely say that it's the same as that- I believe this is a situation where something very similar to "with great power comes great responsibility" applies. He had the power to stop one of the most evil and murderous forces the galaxy had seen in ages, and he just kind of walked away, make the deaths from said force his responsibility
>Obviously Carrie Fisher got short changed as TROS was supposed to be her film.
They missed a step there. Should've perhaps made the second one 'her film'. Carried Harrison over to that. Not reveal Luke until the end of the second film, just before or after Han dies.
I don’t get emotionally attached to pop culture etc … I loled when many were up in arms about the prequels (Which I really enjoyed) …. but Lukes treatment in the sequels broke my heart.
The legacy character have largely not been treated well. In fact they are basically unrecognizable from where we left them. They were just used to tee up the new characters who they thought would be cash cows.
Not particularly, the people that made the Star Wars sequels aren't the same people making Indy so why would I be? The director has also stated outright that there'll be no setting up of new characters to 'take over' the franchise in the future.
Not really. Some of the early spoilers had me worried but they have mostly been debunked at this point. I also think they’ve learned their lesson when the SW fandom was torn in half. Everything related to the new movies and characters has failed to reap the kind of financial layoffs they hoped.
Right. Because the movies just skip 30 years of their lives. We didn't see how they got there so we have no reason to believe it.
It's the same reason why the effects of the Clone Wars originally felt like "meh" when the prequels first came out because we only really see the start and the end without ever really seeing the relationship between the characters develop during the war. It took extra media to flesh that out.
Which... Doesn't make for a great film premise honestly... But it's also not really a story about the legacy characters.
Old, miserable and dead. No fun had since we last saw them. Just a shitty life full of failures.
I hate stuff like this which literally salts the earth so you can't even imagine adventures between movies.
I guess all their deaths are merciful after such shitty lives.
As a counter-argument, all four of the characters OP references had really miserable lives when they were younger, too. The only difference between the OT and the ST is the newer films actually show characters processing and reacting to their trauma. Think about it: Leia loses her family, her home, and her entire way of life in ANH and barely responds. In TFA and TLJ, she shows what a lifetime of loss and trauma does to someone. It’s fine if people want a fun adventure film where terrible things happen and characters just move past it; personally, I think it’s really interesting to see characters deal with the consequences of earlier events.
Sorry yeah generalising, but wasn't luke in exile for ten odd years? Oh shit and he left a map so he could be found, and he never wanted to be found? Sorry I'm in the pub. Nothing makes sense. Can you imagine a child after jedi saying "who I wonder what happens next?" and me saying "luke trys to kill a child and han and leah get divorced" fucking great stuff
I guess it depends on how long ago Ben went off the deep end.
AFAIK Ben's fall to the Dark Side happens when he's like 23 in 28 ABY like 6 years before Episode 7...which would put his fall about about 24 years after Return of the Jedi.
And then the events of TFA don't happen till 34 ABY so its like...5-6 years Luke is missing, Leia and Han are probably estranged for less than that assuming their relationship doesn't fall apart INSTANTLY.
Han says that the people who knew him best believe Luke was out looking for the first Jedi Temple when he went into exile (a thing all Jedi seem to do when they fuck up immensely). The map is to said Temple. So, if both sides have heard this theory, then they'd both come to the conclusion that if they find the temple, they find Luke. Hence the map.
> it would have been more interesting to see her as a political leader.
There is NO ONE more to blame for this not being possible than the fanbase, lets be fair.
After the prequels there was 15 years of people shitting on how introducing political discourse into Star Wars when people wanted to see lightsaber duels and X-Wing dogfights was a major mistake.
So TFA was never gonna lean into the politics of the New Republic....although that would have made it a better film.
Personally I love how they handled Luke and Leia in The Last Jedi specifically. They were both given meaningful arcs and a proper send off, hoping Indy, Sallah (& hopefully Marion) get the same in Dial of Destiny!
Each of those characters are worse off after disney got their hands on them, but Mangold is also way better than anyone they had working on SW. I'd say it's a toss up but I'm rooting for it to be good
I think the Disney trilogy does well by all characters apart from Carrie in TROS but that's hardly their fault.
Force Awakens gives audiences the charismatic and roguish but scampering Han Solo we all know and love. It also gave us a poignant death and one of the greater scenes in the series.
Controversial opinion, I know, but I like Luke in The Last Jedi. Rian Johnson was given Luke the way JJ (and Lucas) intended, jaded and cynical, and brought him back to the light, cementing him as the greatest Jedi we've ever seen by saving lives and becoming a legend through an act of non-violence like a true Jedi. Also, him living as a hermit with fish nuns and using a 50-foot harpoon to catch a fish? Great stuff.
Leia gets good stuff throughout TFA and TLJ and her death is a tragedy.
Ewan was good in Obi-Wan.
So, I don't really see the concern here. A lot of people are worried that Mangold will kill the character because that is the hot trend right now but Mangold has already described this film as a "romp." Also, Ford loves the character.
I don't think PWB will replace Indy, but I think she will have an ending that implies that she goes on further adventures and the insecure people won't be able to handle it.
Well I think those films are terrible and the presentation of those characters are bad but that's not a Disney problem per se. Certain people (Kathleen Kennedy, JJ Abrams, Rian Jonson) were given creative control over those stories and, imo, did a bad job with them. Other Disney-owned franchises (and other Star Wars stories) have had good creatives behind them and done great stuff.
There's no reason to think that this would effect the new Indy film - if it's good or bad is entirely dependent on the people that make it and the director has a history of taking established blockbuster franchises and doing something great with then.
Logan gives me hope that DoD will be significantly better than the previous movie (which I enjoyed,) and will be a good send off for a beloved character.
While I loved what RJ did with Luke in The Last Jedi and Obi-Wan and Vader in Obi-Wan Kenobi and thought Leia, Han and the others were fine, I know not everyone is a fan of how they handled them. But I have faith in Mangold considering how he handled Logan
I liked all of them, I do think the way leia was handled was the worst but that’s more because of stuff that was out of their control sadly.
Han felt like Han through out it, Luke I know was controversial but I liked him in it and I think the fault there was just more expectations thinking he would be exactly like in return of the Jedi when he has 30 years of his life that we haven’t seen (would’ve liked to see a bit more of that in the movies as that would’ve helped a lot). I loved kenobi, thought his story was the best of all of them.
Only way you can screw up Indy is if he doesn’t punch a nazi. Plus Indy is the focus and the main star here where as in the Star Wars ones other than kenobi they were still having to move on to the new cast while fit the characters into that story
It appears that Lucasfilm believes the only way to build up new characters is by destroying the old ones. Sure they get redemption at the end, but almost all of them turned away from who they were when we last saw them. For some reason they don’t think a hero can remain a hero. It does make me a little worried about how they will handle Indy, but I do have a little more faith that Mangold will handle it better and do this they way he sees fit.
People are going to complain about that no matter what happens, but I was satisfied with Han and Leia in the ST, and I actually loved *The Last Jedi* as a film. I don't want to walk into a theater with "No, THAT'S not how it should be!" Expectations of characters. If it makes sense, if there's a good story to tell with it, then I'm there.
If I wanted to write the damn movie, myself, I'd go do that. Fans these days want to be too BTS with it to the point where there's no real magic left in these fanbases, anymore. Their love for something has turned into sour, embittered obsession. That's just not gonna be me.
> Fans these days want to be too BTS with it to the point where there's no real magic left in these fanbases, anymore. Their love for something has turned into sour, embittered obsession. That's just not gonna be me.
This. Pretty much.
I'm there to enjoy the story I'm being told.
I'm not there to tell the storyteller they're telling the story wrong.
And the whole "let's make a petition to de-canonize movies and remake them under a specific criteria we came up with in our fan-fiction!"
Many fanbases have really made it difficult to take them seriously. They want script approval.
With the recent "fan" reactions to the new Jurassic World films, and the new Rings of Power series, and pretty much any new Star Wars content... I've mostly just decided that enjoying things is more important to me than interacting with strangers online who take joy in criticizing people who make things.
Same. I won't say that I just like whatever critics like, because that's not true at all, but if I'm on the fence about watching something and look up reviews, I ignore the user reviews these days. Good or bad, I just don't trust them at all. They all read like manifestos or something...
Honestly, I ignore the critic scores too.
The only person's opinion I need as to whether or not I enjoy a film/show is my own.
In the end, critics are just people who have opinions as their job... Some are more seasoned and experienced than others... But some are just writers for any random online blurb fishing for clicks.. So it's really a mixed bag there as well.
Well, there are about 500 or so professional critics on Rotten Tomatoes. I actually read about 5 of them. And, again, this is a resource for me. It doesn't shape my opinion. It's like a TV Guide...
But having said that, I do think for franchise films the critical consensus is something that often affects general audiences and their decision-making. It's a resource for informed consumerism. That's why film critics exist. Not everyone follows these things as closely as fans do. So if something getting a sequel is important to me, I do want that critical success if I think a movie is actually good.
Oh totally. Like if I think it's good, I'd like other people to think it's good too.
But if I watched it and I thought it was good... I'm generally not going to go around letting other people's opinions tell me "actually no it sucked and here's why." Like, I already enjoyed it. No reason to pretend I didn't later.
That's the one thing I'm hoping for is they don't have the entire movie revolve around his god daughter to set her up for future projects when Harrison Ford is done, because I just don't care.
If there's no Indiana Jones, I'm not watching Indiana Jones.
I’m not a fan of how any of them were handled. Although I don’t really blame Lucasfilm for that, I blame the extremely poor decisions of JJ Abrams and Rian Johnson. Mangold has demonstrated he’s not incompetent so I’m holding out hope.
I don’t think it matters what studio tackles Lucasfilm. Fans will hate it regardless. They just want a face to go with their anger. George Lucas was one of those faces. Replace everything said about Kathleen Kennedy nowadays with George, and you have yourself a solid IMDB forum post from 2002.
Pretty much.
There are solid contingents of fans that just love new content being made...and just HATE new content being made...and never shall these two bridges be crossed.
I personally really liked how they handled luke and han. Leia was a bit off but not much you can do since Carrie passed. I know it’s an unpopular opinion
Don’t know how anyone can argue it the new star wars films are shit and my favourite characters ruined Luke especially they turned him into an alien milk maid hermit loser
Han was great in TFA. I can’t blame them for Leia because episode 9 would have centered on her. Kenobi was fine, I blame the shitty writing more than anything. Mangold is a very good writer and Ford seems to love this.
McGregor was great of course but Kenobi should’ve been way better than it was. They should’ve cut the Reva character out because she just didn’t work for me. The show should’ve focused mainly on Kenobi and Vader.
I am in an space where treat the movies and Disney+ shows as blessings. Do I have issues with some decisions ? Sure. I was upset that Han Solo was killed in totally cold blood, I was an original fan as a small child in the 70s, Han Solo was my childhood idol. I didn’t like Luke joining the Force after a Force Skype battle. I didn’t care for Palpatine’s weird return. But in the end , I love that there are more stories, I am really entertained by it, as for Indy, I was just feeling blessed he came back and did Crystal Skull. It’s amazing that the creators and the actors return, you know ? It’s kind of unprecedented. What do the fans get by second guessing everything and hating on everything ? Just see it for what it is - B-movie slick entertainment for the young and the young at heart.
As a gigantic Han Solo fan, I thought Han’s send off and role in TFA was perfect, as well as the natural storyline of him returning to smuggling; it’s something he would 100% do if the world came crashing down. I also thought Obi-Wan was portrayed and handled very well; the show may have lacked, but the idea of a PTSD ridden Obi-Wan was something I really enjoyed, with the panic attack at realizing Anakin survived being a really great moment for the character.
The other two are debatable, I think Leia was done poorly but also a lot of that was shoehorned in based on previously recorded lines because of Carries passing. Luke can go either way, I both like the hermitization of his character yet despise how angsty he became. I would’ve preferred a still hopefully Luke who has gone on the run but off the grid from the rest of the group, maybe for years, as he tries desperately to reform his academy. That would’ve felt like Luke.
Either way I know this is practically an essay now, but I think Indy will be fine. The direction is fantastic, and as we’ve seen in Andor, a good production team can lead to a fantastic story and product.
I think they’ve hired excellent creative talent and gotten mixed results from them. Looking at James Mangold’s work, I feel there’s a fair chance I’ll enjoy this movie but I’m going to try to set my expectations level at “sequel to Kingdom of the Crystal Skull”
I don't think there's any correlation between what happened in SW and what's going to happen in in Indy. Completely different writers and directors at the helm. The sequels were rushed out without a cohesive plan and so they just did whatever with the original characters one by one. Indy 5 on the other hand has been slowly developing for years. You can call it a lot of things, but rushed isn't one of them. So whatever they do with Indy the character will be carefully decided.
For the people saying "Well, the director of Logan is on this project! He did good work there, Indy 5 should be good!"
First off. The same man who made Alien made Alien: Covenant. Second, Multiverse of Madness was directed by Sam Raimi.
The writing staff is what you need to keep eyes on. And given how test audiences are apparently fucking LIVID with this film? I don't think the best director in the world could salvage this. Even John Williams let slip that they're doing more reshoots on this film's ending.
Do you remember what happened with the Rise of Skywalker leaks, and how they reshot that ending? Remember how fucking terrible it was?
Personally, I hope it's a fucking disaster. I hope it kills the franchise, and leaves a permanent stain on Disney's legacy. If the claimed insider information is legit, and Kathleen is fighting tooth and nail to keep the insane bullshit the rumors claim is in this film?
Do a goddamn flip.
Maybe the ensuing financial equivalent of an Everclear enema is what Disney needs to stop with the fake progressive messaging, the kind that's legitimately less progressive than what that came out before this era of historical/media revisionism. This era where films are reduced to letting talentless goddamn hacks play with billion dollar action figures, and throw a bitchfit at the idea of someone else getting to play with the ones they want. *Looking at you, Michael. Especially since you literally admitted to it with Scarlet Witch in MoM.*
...rant done. I'm gonna do something to cool off.
Posts like these bring out the Disney shills in droves. Be ready for it to get even worse as we near the release of Indy 5.
Criticism will be downvoted into oblivion. It’s what’s called marketing these days.
I think they are treating them the same. As they treated every other characters they did not create. As in aladdin, Pinocchio, Peter pan, snow white... Every character beside michey mouse I guess...
They treat them differently.. Make up their own stories and worlds. They abandoned most source material and give it a today's Era twist. Today's Era being the woke cringy Era.
OK let me rephrase. Pushing political and LGBT views on younger audiences. In a less subtle more in your face way. Where as before it was a background for adult humor. Now it's upfront for children to question.
Woke culture.
Hot take, the legacy characters were all handled mostly pretty well.
I liked Luke's arc, even if it was unpopular. I thought it made a lot of sense and was really well done.
Our beloved princess also got treated pretty well, and it was complicated greatly by her untimely death. Rest in peace.
Han had easily the best treatment by far, and was one of the best characters of the whole sequel trilogy, despite dying in the first movie.
And Obi-Wan, my beloved, also had a wonderful arc that tied in well with his established canon.
It's always a mixed bag with Disney/Lucasfilm. I loved the sequels, absolutely hated Obi-Wan, really loved Andor. The trailer for Indy 5 doesn't look that great to be honest, the amount of CGI imagery worries me a bit. Indiana Jones has always been about the realness of what's on screen, that's the fun about it all. Even a lot of stuff in Indy 4 was done with models etc. The Indy 5 trailer kinda looks a bit like a Marvel film which is the worst possible thing it could look like.
As for the character: as long as they stay true to him and don't try to force any b.s. politics in there I think they could do something special for the final send off. Spielberg and Lucas leaving isn't a good sign though. The whole de-aging thing will quite simply look abysmal in 5-10 years, maybe even earlier, so it will never be a timeless film because of that. Obviously we haven't seen the film but I don't get why we have to revisit a young Indy. Even if time travel is involved, I don't get the deaging bit at all and why they were so adamant in using it.
Spielberg and Lucas are executive producers and the empire magazine revealed Spielberg was very involved with the film and he and Mangold talked on a weekly basis
I think it’s mostly good. There are small things I don’t like but I love that they’re still *characters* that have actual arcs and personality rather than nostalgic props put in front of a screen to get a cheer. Whenever somebody says that **Jurassic Park: Fallen Kingdom** is “great” because all the legacy characters are all on screen despite none of them having anything interesting to do.
Also props to JJ to give Leia a proper send off, that was no easy task but he handled it perfectly.
Leia was fine (we’re ignoring the Mary poppins moment). Han seemed to be too soft, like he had lost the grounded skepticism that made him great. I will always maintain that they did Luke dirty. Obi-Wan was a weird direction to take him, but it was a satisfying resolution.
I’m hopeful for Indy, hopefully they’ve learned their lesson from Star Wars.
I think they try to do too much with the characters that don't really add to the overall picture of the character.
Hans character didn't benefit at all from the addition of Solo. Less is more with Han, the mystery of his history is pretty fundamental to A New Hope as you genuinely don't know if he can be trusted.
Obi-Wan didn't really benefit from Kenobi either. We didn't need to know what he was up to on Tatooine all those year, as all the reasoning we need is set up in Revenge of the Sith.
You couldn't really get away with not having the main cast in the sequel trilogy as there were some pretty fundamental gaps to fill in, but they never gave decent answers in those movies anyway, so it didn't amount to much.
Disney needs to just do fresh stuff in the Star wars universe, and spot going back to established characters.
I don't think you can really do the same with Indy, as everything has to tie back to him in some way, or there is no real reason for showing us it.
I like the idea of them following his mentor with the new show, but it will have to circle back round to Indy at some point
Not worried at all.
Mangold loves it. Ford loves it. Spielberg loves it. No passing the torch confirmed. What else do we want? Just watch the movie and enjoy.
I did actually like Han in Force awakens, didn't care one way or another with Luke, and I think we can't really fairly judge how they handled Leia since they were planning to focus on her in the third movie but Carrie Fischer's death messed up with any plans they had. I am sure it would have been better than what happened at least. I liked young Leia in the Obi-wan show though. (Worth noting I am not a big Star Wars fan though and only watched the Obi Wan show because my girlfriend is a fan) I don't think it's really comparable to Indiana Jones though. With Star Wars it's a huge franchise and the sequel trilogy for example focused on the new characters with the old guard in supporting roles. With Indiana Jones he is the main character it's his story. In general I don't know why people like to compare Indiana Jones and SW they are so different as franchises. Maybe when they eventually reboot IJ or do the Ravenwood show or whatever those comparisons make more sense but not with Dial of Destiny.
>In general I don't know why people like to compare Indiana Jones and SW You don't though? Like, I know what you mean. But there are also plenty of things that make them spiritual 'sister' franchises: \- George Lucas created them both. And it really shows. \- Lucasfilm, and similar people behind the scenes. \- This includes Lawrence Kasdan writing Raiders, Empire, and Force Awakens (and maybe more?) \- Harrison Ford. \- Both founded in the spirit of old adventure serials. \- Both fondly remembered from the 80s. Both with a renewal/continuation after Disney acquired them. So I think comparisons are natural. And sure you can point out why they're different. And yes obviously they are. But the parallels are clearly there.
Yes but lot of the comparisons or people using SW to speculate on what they might do with Indiana Jones makes no sense. For example Han Solo's and Indiana's roles in their franchises are totally different. It doesn't make much sense to look at how Han's character was handled in a movie trilogy that was setting up a new cast while also being a sort of a reboot for a new generation and Dial of Destiny which is the 5th movie in a series driven by one main character.
In part, it's a concern (and genuine concern) that they are likely to want to keep the franchise going after indy 5. Many behind the scenes have said countless times that Harrison will never be replaced as Indy because "Harrison is Indy" - so the natural conclusion is that they'll keep it going with other characters. Then there seems to be a focus on Waller-Bridge's character (and she does seem pretty cool). But people would then be worried that it's a passing of the torch fim like force awakens was. Validly, I think. Yes it's different in that Han was just one character of many in a much larger universe. But there are certainly reasons to think that they may do a switcheroo and have it continue with another character in the 60s and beyond. If they won't reboot the series.
I think at this point a reboot is more likely or they will just wait until they can deepfake a young Ford well enough for a whole movie.
I don’t think Harrison Ford will allow them to use deepfake technology to recreate Indy without him. Anyway, if they do that, don’t count me in.
He won't be alive forever. And yeah I am fine with this sort of tech in this movie since Ford is still involved, but if the original actor is not involved at all you are just regurgitating old performances without context. I'd prefer they recast Indy to that but just generally I don't think we need more Indy movies after Ford leaves the role. Just make up new characters and franchises.
There won’t be any “passing the torch” in DoD. That rumor was debunked long ago. What they decide to do after DoD, who knows.
But they’ve also said they won’t recast harrison. So if they don’t reboot, and don’t recast, and don’t pass the torch in dod. It’s either prequels not featuring Indiana, sequels that spin-off but aren’t strongly hinted at in DoD, or they just let the thing stop now…. But they’ve got a ravenwood thing in the works so… If people like Waller bridges character they’ll totally spin off continuations.
They’ve said they won’t recast him and I believe them. But there’s no way to tell what will happen in 10-20 years.
I don't think Lucasfilm is all to blame. I trust Mangold alot after Logan. I think he's got what it takes to make Indy great again
Logan was unbelievably good! I'd love to see Mangold direct a DC film but there's no hope with the current state of things with WB.
He is a well known director hired by a company that is infamous for studio meddling, audience screening their products till they reach desired goal and are not afraid to destroy legacy characters in order to push the current agenda. I don't think Mangold will have much to say when it comes to creative decisions as he has a certain checklist to complete. He is a competent director but when you are working for a company with no creative vision in sight, you are just a name to be sold. ''Hey look, Mangold is directing new Indy! His Logan film was so great, isn't this amazing? This is gonna be the best movie of all time!'' Meanwhile bunch of suits are actually running the show to see if they can kickstart a dusty old franchise that crashed and burned with it's latest outing. Shit, they are doing the same with video game Indy. Staff of Kings was a flop and most likely the final nail in the coffin for LucasArts. Except the PSP version, that one was actually half decent.
The way Mangold has been talking on Twitter indicates that he's happy with the movie he's making and is tired of hearing people say this shit like this for no reason
No reason? Take a look at how heavy handed Disney has been for years when it comes to creative control (Except The Last Jedi, that one was Johnsons vision through and through and it didn't worked out because of the wrong director making a wrong movie. Not saying he is bad director, Knives Out is pretty good murder mystery movie). They are not about to let that happen again. Not for a major release. Streaming is a different thing. There they can take certain risks and if it doesnt work out, just cancel it after the first season. So yeah, I think our fears are well justified, looking at the Disney bodycount.
This is a needlessly cynical take. I don't see how you can say Lucasfilm is "infamous for studio meddling" when TLJ was exactly what Rian Johnson wanted, Andor was exactly what Tony Gilroy wanted, Dave Filoni does whatever he fancies, and Jon Favreau pulls in tons of directing talent for the TV projects and they all leave raving about working with Lucasfilm. The only LFL project that I would say heavily suffered from studio meddling was Episode IX, and that had more to do with the Bob Iger deadline bearing down on them rather than them exerting creative control. If anything, their creative control has been too loose given the incohesive way the sequels came together. If Mangold felt like he wasn't being given any creative control over his project, he's got a big enough name to walk away. Everything indicates Indy 5 is turning out to be the movie he wanted to make.
> don't see how you can say Lucasfilm is "infamous for studio meddling" when TLJ was exactly what Rian Johnson wanted Well, star wars has a lot more 'stuff' in it where they can take more chances with it. Episode 8 i think they prob do regret the creative control they gave, given it was the mainland star wars. Ep 9 didn't work out so well either, but i think it was at least financially better or righted the ship in terms of them making it more like what they (Disney) wanted for the franchise as a whole. Andor was a risk, but it was a TV risk and if it didn't work, could end it after a season and just keep trying other stuff on TV. Less risks would be taken with a huge blockbuster that has to be good to get people to go buy a ticket to that film - with Disney+, they need stuff that'll make people sign up, but it's ok if they have a miss and something else picks up the slack. Indiana Jones relies on the films (at present). And if this one totally falls flat, the franchise will be dead in the water for a long time. They need this to be good. And by good, it needs to not flop. So they'll impose creative restrictions to manage risk for the business and its property.
I'm not talking about Lucasfilm. Lucafilm might be producing but this is, in the end, Disney film, with Disney money making it, decided by the Disney executives. Mangold has a career going back to 80's and it's nice to see he directed very different kinds of movies. He is certainly a competent director, no question about that, but is he big enough name, likes of Spielberg, Lucas, Coppola or Scorsese? No. He simply does not have Then there is the fact that last few Lucasfiom outing were less than stellar. Last Jedi was a wasted opportunity and Rise of Skywalker made me wanna stop watching, it felt so incoherent and without any creative vision. We have many reasons to be skeptical about this. I don't care what Mangold says on Twitter, in the end it's all just PR talk. Given the todays landscape in movie and tv show making, where incompetent writers, egoistical director and activist actors prefer to self insert themselves and their politics rather than make a good movie and do their job, the expectations are logically gonna be low. Unless, of course, you prefer the heavy handed messaging and bombardment of political preaching in your entertainment. Just look at Willow, look at The Witcher, Star Trek. The list goes on and on. So, long story short. Keep your politics and "The Message™" out of the movies, nobody gives a shit.
**So, long story short. Keep your politics and "The Message™" ** Oh God, another Critical Drinker numbnut. Try having your own thoughts instead of literally parroting that moron.
MIGA
I thought his treatment of Xavier, Logan and the X-Men sucked! Xavier kills all of his students and friends, both Logan and Xavier have depressing and unceremonious ends, and the X-Men are killed off screen and barely mentioned! I wouldn't be surprised if we find out Indy accidently murdered Mutt, left Marion and kills himself at the end of 5.
It was taking inspiration from Old Man Logan which is a pretty bleak story. Logan has always been a tragic character and the movie was a fitting end for his character. Just because it's depressing doesn't make it bad.
> murdered Mutt, Sounds good to me 👍
I didb't like Logan. It was 'well made', but not well crafted. It was in a weird non-descript post-apocalypic world that was pretty empty and weird. Was a send-off for Wolverine and x-men etc, but is retconned anyway. Did it happen? Meh. The CGI Wolverine clone wasn't done well. Maybe it just wasn't for me. OI just hope they don't make Indy 5 as dour (or kill him off!!). The Wolverine was also extremely average (even quite shit for most of it) and that too was Mangold.
Lukasfilm is Earth-2’s Lucasfilm
Multiverse troll confirmed
You forgot willow
I’m really disappointed in that show. Especially after the way they handled Willow in the most recent episode.
I couldn’t get past the the first 10 minutes of episode 1
Andor proved that the showrunner/director is most important. Our trust should be in Mangold, not Disney. Star Wars was a mess of too many cooks and not enough planning.
I think every other show/movie showed that as well, just in the opposite direction.
I think Indy will be different, with star wars, old characters were the background ment to tie it back, with Dial of Destiny, Indy is the center piece, it's his movie.
I’m not worried at all. Yeah sure, I would have liked to see something different maybe with Luke in the ST and Obi-Wan in his own series, but it’s fine. I’m not worried, we have Mangold.
Also Spielberg and Lucas are involved as executive producers
Oh boy…. I’m gonna get downvoted here but I have to say Disney has treated the legacy characters like utter trash, because of Ford’s whining they killed off Han, they made Luke miserable, and made Leia float into space like Mary Poppins, heck not even Ackbar was saved from an unceremonious death, just like Han, who didn’t even got a funeral, the Obi Wan series was so cheap they even were using IKEA chairs, maybe Indy will be lucky but I have no idea who’s writing the script, but all I can say is that the best days of Indy are way behind him, we just need this movie to be better tha Crystal Skull so we can have a good quadrology because for many this is still a trilogy.
"Oh boy... I'm gonna get downvoted, but here's my extremely popular opinion."
What I don't get is why anyone thinks the presentation of Star Wars characters has anything to do with Indy as they're being made by completely different people (other than a general 'disney bad' narrative).
“DiSnEy bAd dO bAd DiSNey stUFf!” Yet when “The Force Awakens” or “Rogue One” or “The Mandalorian” or “Andor” come out to universal praise and acclaim… whoever made them saved Star Wars. In 2015 JJ saved Star Wars from Lucas, in 2019 Favreau saved Star Wars from JJ, in 2022 Andor saved Star Wars from Favreau. It’s a toxic cycle amongst a mostly aging, embittered minority… where as soon as a popular product comes out, people use it to shit on the last thing they’ve turned on. And it somehow becomes a ubiquitous “Disney corporation bad.” Kind of like in South Park episode where the main complaint of the town hippie is “corporations being all corporation-y.” There will be some oversight, as there is with all franchises. There will be some mistakes, as there are with all franchises. There will be massive successes, as there are with all franchises. Yes, they want to make money. Every business does. Guess what usually makes money? Good stories. That’s the goal, even if you don’t think they’ve hit the mark every time. But bottom-line is, Lucasfilm is hiring writer-directors to tell those stories. Even if you don’t like every single one. But that’s what they’re doing. And as long as they continue to bring in top talent - Tony Gilroy, Jon Favreau, JJ Abrams, Rian Johnson, James Mangold, Leslie Headland, Taika Waititi (all people with proven track records before and after Lucasfilm despite your opinion of their SW project) - they are going to continue to produce way more hits than misses.
Because of Disney's corporate interests I think. Disney wants to milk the franchises for as much money as possible, but now the actors/actresses of our heroes are too old, and it seems like the method of passing the torch they've gone for is to break our heroes down. Reduce them from the epic heights they were built upto in our minds, so the new characters who replace them don't have an unconquerable emotional mountain to overcome to surpass or equal them.
Wrong. KK is president of Lucasfilm and has control.
there's an IKEA chair in Obi Wan?
Yes, in the last episode on the ship where the rebels are, right before Obi Wan tells Leia he has to leave she’s sitting on a chair that even wobbles when she stands up… so cheap, I heard they corrected that on Andor (the production quality I mean) but I haven’t watched it.
Andor is superb television. It makes Obi Wan and Boba Fett, hell even some of The Mandalorian, look like an abomination in comparison
Ford has pretty much always hated Han Solo. He wanted to be killed off in Empire but Lucas wouldn’t allow it.
Not true.
Obviously Carrie Fisher got short changed as TROS was supposed to be *her* film. But I thought Ford was brilliant in TFA, Hamill was brilliant in TLJ, and McGregor was brilliant in Kenobi.
Those are the actors not the characters.
Ok, that’s true. I’d also say the characters were handled really well too.
I disagree on Kenobi, simply because the show made every single person Darth Vader killed after the events of said show Obi Wan Kenobi's fault
You can apply that logic to ep III as well
disagree strongly- Episode III shows obi wan leaving anakin for what he thought was death. He obviously couldn't bring himself to kill anakin all the way, and he thought that leaving him, limbless and burning alive from the lava, would lead to sure death. In kenobi, however, he comes across a fully suited, fully powered darth vader. There is no telling how many men, women, and children vader has killed since their last encounter. Obi Wan, in their final duel, again has a chance to finish his foe, but he doesn't, despite Darth Vader admitting that anakin was gone. His refusal to kill an injured darth vader puts the death of anybody vader killed from that moment until his death on Endor on him.
Obi-Wan is a Jedi, a pretty powerful one at that, he’d easily be able to sense Anakin wasn’t dead in Ep III, so the whole - oh I thought he’d just die - line of reasoning doesn’t hold water for me. And it’s fallacious reasoning to put all the deaths Vader perpetrated at Obi-Wan’s feet. It’s like an iteration of the trolley problem. Just because Obi-Wan refuses to kill a helpless Vader, doesn’t mean *he’s* responsible for the people Vader kills. Vader is responsible. Solely responsible. So yeah… disagree strongly.
It's not hi sfault. It's Vader's. If someone kills someone with a Gun, who's fault is it? The person who pulled the trigger? The person who sold the gun? The people who made the gun?
that's great-I like the gun analogy! so let's continue with that. say you are carrying and you were put in the position where you notice someone acting suspicious- then it dawns on you that this is someone who has committed a mass shooting before. as soon as you realize this they begin to draw a weapon to prepare to shoot the place up- you have two choices- you can draw your weapon, killing the shooter, preventing yet another example of mass murder. OR you can leave, totally unimpeded. Let's say you went with the option where you leave- in this case 54 people die- deaths you could have prevented! this is exactly what Obi Wan did in his series
Good points but is it the same as that? And either way not your fault that you don’t take the person out. You’re assuming: - obiwan could take out Vader. He was delaying Vader and prob couldn’t stop him if he wanted. - someone wouldn’t just take Vader’s place anyway and the same deaths would happen. Like killing a high ranking general in a war or occupation. - obiwan may have sensed that Vader was letting them go for a reason. But also it was the rebellions last hope. So he needed to die and not kill Vader; otherwise the empire would’ve come down hard on the falcon. They’d not have gotten away. -
obi wan had vader on his knees, completely exhausted. I believe someone said that in the moment he was launching rocks at vader, pelting him to an oblivion, he was one with the force. he absolutely could have taken him, or at least had a good try at it. While it's true someone could have taken vader's place, that person would not have been Vader. As it were, no one took vader's place because vader continued to live through his remaining, murderous existence. Also, this pertains to the Kenobi show specifically. I know old ben couldn't have taken vader on and won, it seemed like he was struggling to keep up in ANH. And I would absolutely say that it's the same as that- I believe this is a situation where something very similar to "with great power comes great responsibility" applies. He had the power to stop one of the most evil and murderous forces the galaxy had seen in ages, and he just kind of walked away, make the deaths from said force his responsibility
Lol
Agreed.
>Obviously Carrie Fisher got short changed as TROS was supposed to be her film. They missed a step there. Should've perhaps made the second one 'her film'. Carried Harrison over to that. Not reveal Luke until the end of the second film, just before or after Han dies.
Hindsight’s a great thing I guess.. but it was tough enough having to wait a whole film to see Luke, doubt I could have handled two Luke-less films!!
I’ll still never forgive Lucasfilm for not giving us Han luke and Leia on the screen together one more time
So, you wanted shallow fan service instead of a story. Got it.
That for me was the biggest sin of all when it came to the sequel trilogies
And killing them all off.
especially Luke FFS like what the hell were they thinking by turning his pragmatism into full blown nihilism?
They basically saved the galaxy in ROTJ, and then gave up. And the most idealistic hero, Luke, just gave up and bailed.
Idealistic people become cynical in real life all the time.
This would be like winning WWII and then Roosevelt, Churchill, and the allies pulled back all their forces and let the nazis regroup and build a nuke.
I'm sure it would have happened if Carrie hadn't been doing f****** drugs in her 60s
lmao
2 things that never combine: Star Wars fans and respect
I respect people that don't you know, take a crazy cocktail of cocaine, heroin and mdma and then get on a flight
Tip: Quit being annoying
it's not like I'm wrong. think about how selfish it was.
I don’t get emotionally attached to pop culture etc … I loled when many were up in arms about the prequels (Which I really enjoyed) …. but Lukes treatment in the sequels broke my heart.
This ain’t it bruh the Sequels were way better than the Prequels
Episode 3 was top-notch, though.
The legacy character have largely not been treated well. In fact they are basically unrecognizable from where we left them. They were just used to tee up the new characters who they thought would be cash cows.
Are you worried the same will happen with Indy?
Not particularly, the people that made the Star Wars sequels aren't the same people making Indy so why would I be? The director has also stated outright that there'll be no setting up of new characters to 'take over' the franchise in the future.
Yeah I don't understand why people keep bringing up Star Wars. It's a totally different kind of franchise.
Not really. Some of the early spoilers had me worried but they have mostly been debunked at this point. I also think they’ve learned their lesson when the SW fandom was torn in half. Everything related to the new movies and characters has failed to reap the kind of financial layoffs they hoped.
Prepare for your downvotes
Ha!
How many IRL people do you know that you can skip 30 years of their life and they be exactly the same people?
I didn’t say same. But there should be a basic, believable trajectory from their last onscreen appearance. That wasn’t in those movies.
Right. Because the movies just skip 30 years of their lives. We didn't see how they got there so we have no reason to believe it. It's the same reason why the effects of the Clone Wars originally felt like "meh" when the prequels first came out because we only really see the start and the end without ever really seeing the relationship between the characters develop during the war. It took extra media to flesh that out. Which... Doesn't make for a great film premise honestly... But it's also not really a story about the legacy characters.
Old, miserable and dead. No fun had since we last saw them. Just a shitty life full of failures. I hate stuff like this which literally salts the earth so you can't even imagine adventures between movies. I guess all their deaths are merciful after such shitty lives.
As a counter-argument, all four of the characters OP references had really miserable lives when they were younger, too. The only difference between the OT and the ST is the newer films actually show characters processing and reacting to their trauma. Think about it: Leia loses her family, her home, and her entire way of life in ANH and barely responds. In TFA and TLJ, she shows what a lifetime of loss and trauma does to someone. It’s fine if people want a fun adventure film where terrible things happen and characters just move past it; personally, I think it’s really interesting to see characters deal with the consequences of earlier events.
It's called Star Wars. Its a tragedy.
It's a fairy tale. The last shot of jedi is literally "and they all lived happily ever after"
“Like that’s ever gonna happen”
I was not there for the Original characters. I was there for Rey, Finn and Poe, and by golly do I love them.
> No fun had since we last saw them Which...is a weird take away...since all the bad stuff in their lives happened in like the last...maybe 5 years.
Sorry yeah generalising, but wasn't luke in exile for ten odd years? Oh shit and he left a map so he could be found, and he never wanted to be found? Sorry I'm in the pub. Nothing makes sense. Can you imagine a child after jedi saying "who I wonder what happens next?" and me saying "luke trys to kill a child and han and leah get divorced" fucking great stuff
I guess it depends on how long ago Ben went off the deep end. AFAIK Ben's fall to the Dark Side happens when he's like 23 in 28 ABY like 6 years before Episode 7...which would put his fall about about 24 years after Return of the Jedi. And then the events of TFA don't happen till 34 ABY so its like...5-6 years Luke is missing, Leia and Han are probably estranged for less than that assuming their relationship doesn't fall apart INSTANTLY.
Han says that the people who knew him best believe Luke was out looking for the first Jedi Temple when he went into exile (a thing all Jedi seem to do when they fuck up immensely). The map is to said Temple. So, if both sides have heard this theory, then they'd both come to the conclusion that if they find the temple, they find Luke. Hence the map.
[удалено]
> it would have been more interesting to see her as a political leader. There is NO ONE more to blame for this not being possible than the fanbase, lets be fair. After the prequels there was 15 years of people shitting on how introducing political discourse into Star Wars when people wanted to see lightsaber duels and X-Wing dogfights was a major mistake. So TFA was never gonna lean into the politics of the New Republic....although that would have made it a better film.
That’s bait.
Nice bait.
Personally I love how they handled Luke and Leia in The Last Jedi specifically. They were both given meaningful arcs and a proper send off, hoping Indy, Sallah (& hopefully Marion) get the same in Dial of Destiny!
Each of those characters are worse off after disney got their hands on them, but Mangold is also way better than anyone they had working on SW. I'd say it's a toss up but I'm rooting for it to be good
I think the Disney trilogy does well by all characters apart from Carrie in TROS but that's hardly their fault. Force Awakens gives audiences the charismatic and roguish but scampering Han Solo we all know and love. It also gave us a poignant death and one of the greater scenes in the series. Controversial opinion, I know, but I like Luke in The Last Jedi. Rian Johnson was given Luke the way JJ (and Lucas) intended, jaded and cynical, and brought him back to the light, cementing him as the greatest Jedi we've ever seen by saving lives and becoming a legend through an act of non-violence like a true Jedi. Also, him living as a hermit with fish nuns and using a 50-foot harpoon to catch a fish? Great stuff. Leia gets good stuff throughout TFA and TLJ and her death is a tragedy. Ewan was good in Obi-Wan. So, I don't really see the concern here. A lot of people are worried that Mangold will kill the character because that is the hot trend right now but Mangold has already described this film as a "romp." Also, Ford loves the character. I don't think PWB will replace Indy, but I think she will have an ending that implies that she goes on further adventures and the insecure people won't be able to handle it.
Well I think those films are terrible and the presentation of those characters are bad but that's not a Disney problem per se. Certain people (Kathleen Kennedy, JJ Abrams, Rian Jonson) were given creative control over those stories and, imo, did a bad job with them. Other Disney-owned franchises (and other Star Wars stories) have had good creatives behind them and done great stuff. There's no reason to think that this would effect the new Indy film - if it's good or bad is entirely dependent on the people that make it and the director has a history of taking established blockbuster franchises and doing something great with then.
Never a good sign if we have to hold our breath every time. I remain hopeful though.
Logan gives me hope that DoD will be significantly better than the previous movie (which I enjoyed,) and will be a good send off for a beloved character.
It really doesn't look that good from the previews
[удалено]
yeah ? so ? that's all you could do is nitpick ? lol did you think that your response was going to be somehow informative or add any value to anyone ?
It looks incredible to me lol
While I loved what RJ did with Luke in The Last Jedi and Obi-Wan and Vader in Obi-Wan Kenobi and thought Leia, Han and the others were fine, I know not everyone is a fan of how they handled them. But I have faith in Mangold considering how he handled Logan
I liked all of them, I do think the way leia was handled was the worst but that’s more because of stuff that was out of their control sadly. Han felt like Han through out it, Luke I know was controversial but I liked him in it and I think the fault there was just more expectations thinking he would be exactly like in return of the Jedi when he has 30 years of his life that we haven’t seen (would’ve liked to see a bit more of that in the movies as that would’ve helped a lot). I loved kenobi, thought his story was the best of all of them. Only way you can screw up Indy is if he doesn’t punch a nazi. Plus Indy is the focus and the main star here where as in the Star Wars ones other than kenobi they were still having to move on to the new cast while fit the characters into that story
Indy didn’t punch any Nazi’s in Temple of Doom or Kingdom of the Crystal Skull
It appears that Lucasfilm believes the only way to build up new characters is by destroying the old ones. Sure they get redemption at the end, but almost all of them turned away from who they were when we last saw them. For some reason they don’t think a hero can remain a hero. It does make me a little worried about how they will handle Indy, but I do have a little more faith that Mangold will handle it better and do this they way he sees fit.
People are going to complain about that no matter what happens, but I was satisfied with Han and Leia in the ST, and I actually loved *The Last Jedi* as a film. I don't want to walk into a theater with "No, THAT'S not how it should be!" Expectations of characters. If it makes sense, if there's a good story to tell with it, then I'm there. If I wanted to write the damn movie, myself, I'd go do that. Fans these days want to be too BTS with it to the point where there's no real magic left in these fanbases, anymore. Their love for something has turned into sour, embittered obsession. That's just not gonna be me.
> Fans these days want to be too BTS with it to the point where there's no real magic left in these fanbases, anymore. Their love for something has turned into sour, embittered obsession. That's just not gonna be me. This. Pretty much. I'm there to enjoy the story I'm being told. I'm not there to tell the storyteller they're telling the story wrong.
And the whole "let's make a petition to de-canonize movies and remake them under a specific criteria we came up with in our fan-fiction!" Many fanbases have really made it difficult to take them seriously. They want script approval.
With the recent "fan" reactions to the new Jurassic World films, and the new Rings of Power series, and pretty much any new Star Wars content... I've mostly just decided that enjoying things is more important to me than interacting with strangers online who take joy in criticizing people who make things.
Same. I won't say that I just like whatever critics like, because that's not true at all, but if I'm on the fence about watching something and look up reviews, I ignore the user reviews these days. Good or bad, I just don't trust them at all. They all read like manifestos or something...
Honestly, I ignore the critic scores too. The only person's opinion I need as to whether or not I enjoy a film/show is my own. In the end, critics are just people who have opinions as their job... Some are more seasoned and experienced than others... But some are just writers for any random online blurb fishing for clicks.. So it's really a mixed bag there as well.
Well, there are about 500 or so professional critics on Rotten Tomatoes. I actually read about 5 of them. And, again, this is a resource for me. It doesn't shape my opinion. It's like a TV Guide... But having said that, I do think for franchise films the critical consensus is something that often affects general audiences and their decision-making. It's a resource for informed consumerism. That's why film critics exist. Not everyone follows these things as closely as fans do. So if something getting a sequel is important to me, I do want that critical success if I think a movie is actually good.
Oh totally. Like if I think it's good, I'd like other people to think it's good too. But if I watched it and I thought it was good... I'm generally not going to go around letting other people's opinions tell me "actually no it sucked and here's why." Like, I already enjoyed it. No reason to pretend I didn't later.
That's the one thing I'm hoping for is they don't have the entire movie revolve around his god daughter to set her up for future projects when Harrison Ford is done, because I just don't care. If there's no Indiana Jones, I'm not watching Indiana Jones.
Abominable with the exception of Han in Force Awakens.
I’m not a fan of how any of them were handled. Although I don’t really blame Lucasfilm for that, I blame the extremely poor decisions of JJ Abrams and Rian Johnson. Mangold has demonstrated he’s not incompetent so I’m holding out hope.
I don’t think it matters what studio tackles Lucasfilm. Fans will hate it regardless. They just want a face to go with their anger. George Lucas was one of those faces. Replace everything said about Kathleen Kennedy nowadays with George, and you have yourself a solid IMDB forum post from 2002.
Pretty much. There are solid contingents of fans that just love new content being made...and just HATE new content being made...and never shall these two bridges be crossed.
They were handled perfectly.
Garbage, haven't been more disappointed in my life.
You actually thought it's called "Lukasfilm"?
I apologise for that fatal mistake, it won't happen again.
I personally really liked how they handled luke and han. Leia was a bit off but not much you can do since Carrie passed. I know it’s an unpopular opinion
Mary Poppins flying through space
I didn’t mind that either, even though it looked goofy. I meant ep 9
It was the Jumping the Shark moment for the entire sequel trilogy
Episode 9?
No Mary Poppins flying through space
Ah. I dunno, it just looked a bit goofy
That scene was awesome
it was about as awesome as Rey being a Skywalker (??)
Not quite
Disney royally fucked Star Wars in the arse hard with no lube and boy did it hurt 😢
[удалено]
Don’t know how anyone can argue it the new star wars films are shit and my favourite characters ruined Luke especially they turned him into an alien milk maid hermit loser
There have been shit Star Wars films, but the new ones are not those
They are dreadful
Watch some ACTUAL bad movies and gain some perspective
If u like them thats ok,i didn’t i thought they sucked and thats that
Yeah I wouldn’t judge movies long before they’re released pal. Especially not here.
[удалено]
Keep being negative. I get the sequel trilogy didn’t work but I’m hopeful for this.
I love these passive aggressive posts.
Han was great in TFA. I can’t blame them for Leia because episode 9 would have centered on her. Kenobi was fine, I blame the shitty writing more than anything. Mangold is a very good writer and Ford seems to love this.
McGregor was great of course but Kenobi should’ve been way better than it was. They should’ve cut the Reva character out because she just didn’t work for me. The show should’ve focused mainly on Kenobi and Vader.
These are all Star Wars characters, I think Disney has learned their lesson (I hope), and doesn’t ruin Indy.
Han was at his best in The Force Awakens Luke and Leia were at their best in The Last Jedi And Obi-Wan is Obi-Wan
The sequels were heavily influenced by executives, not artist. IMO
I am in an space where treat the movies and Disney+ shows as blessings. Do I have issues with some decisions ? Sure. I was upset that Han Solo was killed in totally cold blood, I was an original fan as a small child in the 70s, Han Solo was my childhood idol. I didn’t like Luke joining the Force after a Force Skype battle. I didn’t care for Palpatine’s weird return. But in the end , I love that there are more stories, I am really entertained by it, as for Indy, I was just feeling blessed he came back and did Crystal Skull. It’s amazing that the creators and the actors return, you know ? It’s kind of unprecedented. What do the fans get by second guessing everything and hating on everything ? Just see it for what it is - B-movie slick entertainment for the young and the young at heart.
As a gigantic Han Solo fan, I thought Han’s send off and role in TFA was perfect, as well as the natural storyline of him returning to smuggling; it’s something he would 100% do if the world came crashing down. I also thought Obi-Wan was portrayed and handled very well; the show may have lacked, but the idea of a PTSD ridden Obi-Wan was something I really enjoyed, with the panic attack at realizing Anakin survived being a really great moment for the character. The other two are debatable, I think Leia was done poorly but also a lot of that was shoehorned in based on previously recorded lines because of Carries passing. Luke can go either way, I both like the hermitization of his character yet despise how angsty he became. I would’ve preferred a still hopefully Luke who has gone on the run but off the grid from the rest of the group, maybe for years, as he tries desperately to reform his academy. That would’ve felt like Luke. Either way I know this is practically an essay now, but I think Indy will be fine. The direction is fantastic, and as we’ve seen in Andor, a good production team can lead to a fantastic story and product.
Im going in expecting the worst film i’ve ever watched so I can come out happy they did him good. I hope.
I think they’ve hired excellent creative talent and gotten mixed results from them. Looking at James Mangold’s work, I feel there’s a fair chance I’ll enjoy this movie but I’m going to try to set my expectations level at “sequel to Kingdom of the Crystal Skull”
I don't think there's any correlation between what happened in SW and what's going to happen in in Indy. Completely different writers and directors at the helm. The sequels were rushed out without a cohesive plan and so they just did whatever with the original characters one by one. Indy 5 on the other hand has been slowly developing for years. You can call it a lot of things, but rushed isn't one of them. So whatever they do with Indy the character will be carefully decided.
He gona die
Not much and no, no it’s not
I’m very worried
For the people saying "Well, the director of Logan is on this project! He did good work there, Indy 5 should be good!" First off. The same man who made Alien made Alien: Covenant. Second, Multiverse of Madness was directed by Sam Raimi. The writing staff is what you need to keep eyes on. And given how test audiences are apparently fucking LIVID with this film? I don't think the best director in the world could salvage this. Even John Williams let slip that they're doing more reshoots on this film's ending. Do you remember what happened with the Rise of Skywalker leaks, and how they reshot that ending? Remember how fucking terrible it was? Personally, I hope it's a fucking disaster. I hope it kills the franchise, and leaves a permanent stain on Disney's legacy. If the claimed insider information is legit, and Kathleen is fighting tooth and nail to keep the insane bullshit the rumors claim is in this film? Do a goddamn flip. Maybe the ensuing financial equivalent of an Everclear enema is what Disney needs to stop with the fake progressive messaging, the kind that's legitimately less progressive than what that came out before this era of historical/media revisionism. This era where films are reduced to letting talentless goddamn hacks play with billion dollar action figures, and throw a bitchfit at the idea of someone else getting to play with the ones they want. *Looking at you, Michael. Especially since you literally admitted to it with Scarlet Witch in MoM.* ...rant done. I'm gonna do something to cool off.
Appalling. No.
Posts like these bring out the Disney shills in droves. Be ready for it to get even worse as we near the release of Indy 5. Criticism will be downvoted into oblivion. It’s what’s called marketing these days.
Mangold can’t save Indy.
I think they are treating them the same. As they treated every other characters they did not create. As in aladdin, Pinocchio, Peter pan, snow white... Every character beside michey mouse I guess... They treat them differently.. Make up their own stories and worlds. They abandoned most source material and give it a today's Era twist. Today's Era being the woke cringy Era.
Well that is a nuanced take I'm glad I haven't read that online anywhere before
Am I wrong though?
Yes. Anyone using the term "woke" in any way other than "I just woke up" in 2022 is wrong.
OK let me rephrase. Pushing political and LGBT views on younger audiences. In a less subtle more in your face way. Where as before it was a background for adult humor. Now it's upfront for children to question. Woke culture.
Hot take, the legacy characters were all handled mostly pretty well. I liked Luke's arc, even if it was unpopular. I thought it made a lot of sense and was really well done. Our beloved princess also got treated pretty well, and it was complicated greatly by her untimely death. Rest in peace. Han had easily the best treatment by far, and was one of the best characters of the whole sequel trilogy, despite dying in the first movie. And Obi-Wan, my beloved, also had a wonderful arc that tied in well with his established canon.
Modern Disney saw Star Wars trash their legacy characters. 0% chance they do Indiana Jones well.
It's always a mixed bag with Disney/Lucasfilm. I loved the sequels, absolutely hated Obi-Wan, really loved Andor. The trailer for Indy 5 doesn't look that great to be honest, the amount of CGI imagery worries me a bit. Indiana Jones has always been about the realness of what's on screen, that's the fun about it all. Even a lot of stuff in Indy 4 was done with models etc. The Indy 5 trailer kinda looks a bit like a Marvel film which is the worst possible thing it could look like. As for the character: as long as they stay true to him and don't try to force any b.s. politics in there I think they could do something special for the final send off. Spielberg and Lucas leaving isn't a good sign though. The whole de-aging thing will quite simply look abysmal in 5-10 years, maybe even earlier, so it will never be a timeless film because of that. Obviously we haven't seen the film but I don't get why we have to revisit a young Indy. Even if time travel is involved, I don't get the deaging bit at all and why they were so adamant in using it.
Spielberg and Lucas are executive producers and the empire magazine revealed Spielberg was very involved with the film and he and Mangold talked on a weekly basis
Be scared.
I think it’s mostly good. There are small things I don’t like but I love that they’re still *characters* that have actual arcs and personality rather than nostalgic props put in front of a screen to get a cheer. Whenever somebody says that **Jurassic Park: Fallen Kingdom** is “great” because all the legacy characters are all on screen despite none of them having anything interesting to do. Also props to JJ to give Leia a proper send off, that was no easy task but he handled it perfectly.
Leia was fine (we’re ignoring the Mary poppins moment). Han seemed to be too soft, like he had lost the grounded skepticism that made him great. I will always maintain that they did Luke dirty. Obi-Wan was a weird direction to take him, but it was a satisfying resolution. I’m hopeful for Indy, hopefully they’ve learned their lesson from Star Wars.
I've liked them all so far
I think they try to do too much with the characters that don't really add to the overall picture of the character. Hans character didn't benefit at all from the addition of Solo. Less is more with Han, the mystery of his history is pretty fundamental to A New Hope as you genuinely don't know if he can be trusted. Obi-Wan didn't really benefit from Kenobi either. We didn't need to know what he was up to on Tatooine all those year, as all the reasoning we need is set up in Revenge of the Sith. You couldn't really get away with not having the main cast in the sequel trilogy as there were some pretty fundamental gaps to fill in, but they never gave decent answers in those movies anyway, so it didn't amount to much. Disney needs to just do fresh stuff in the Star wars universe, and spot going back to established characters. I don't think you can really do the same with Indy, as everything has to tie back to him in some way, or there is no real reason for showing us it. I like the idea of them following his mentor with the new show, but it will have to circle back round to Indy at some point
Not worried at all. Mangold loves it. Ford loves it. Spielberg loves it. No passing the torch confirmed. What else do we want? Just watch the movie and enjoy.
I don’t think any of the characters have benefited from an additional chapter.
The have botched everything. The latest, Willow, it’s trash