Indiana Jones To Arrive Again in 2005

Dolemite_the_Wiz writes "The Raider.net reports that the release date for the next Indiana Jones Movie (tentatively titled 'Indiana Jones 4') is, according to Steven Spielberg, "...going to come out probably for the July 4th weekend of 2005...". The movie looks like it will be set in the 1950s and include just about every main character from the first three films. For more links about this movie, check this search result from Cinescape. Secondly, IndianaJones.com reports that the First three films in the Indiana Jones Trilogy will be released on November 4th. These films have to be one of the most requested DVD releases (probably next to the Original 'Star Wars' trilogy and the first two 'Godfather' movies) ever. " "

This Four DVD set will include:

- Restored Film Footage
- Remastered in THX
- New Dolby 5.1 soundtrack
- A 4th DVD with just about every aspect of how the films were made.

This collection will retail for $49.95 (US)

Here's the official release notice for the DVD.I just hope that the new film and DVD will be able to Satisfy all the Indy fans."

Comments

Not again

[Anonymous Coward]

And then we will have Star Wars 7, Matrix 4, LOTR 4, Harry Potter 5....

I would rather have a single new original movie, instead of tons of the same old stuff.

Re:Not again

[Lord_Slepnir]

I dont know about Star Wars 7, but We won't have LOTR 4 (the books run out), we will have matrix 4 (they planned from the start to have a 5 movie series), and the contract for Harry Potter runs for 7 movies. What's dangerous is when a movie is created that isn't supposted to have a sequel, and one is later tacked on the end: IE, Rocky movies 2-17, CaddyShack II, and 90% of what disney has been creating rescently (Jungle Book 2, Cinderella 2, etc.)

Luck in three's?

[garcia]

What happened to the trilogies that have become so popular?

Back to the Future, Indiana Jones, Star Wars (I refuse to count the three "newest" ones), etc.

While I am midly excited to see that this film is going to be released I don't see it as being popular. They are going to concentrate on large-scale special effects and less on the content (just like all recent films and sequels/pre).

That's my worthless .02

Re:Luck in three's?

[jellomizer]

Well I wouldn't say the Back to the Future is considered a good trilogy. The First Movie Was Good. The Second One was OK and the third was Dumb.

But if IJ and SW I think their appeal was the fact that they were Action Movies and the characters seemed believable and not over the top like todays movies (The Flying Yoda). Sure Luke had some force powers but it was usually limited to moving some small objects (The Return of the Jedi made Yoda seem to really concentrate to move the X-Wing) and some limited last minute extended super human tequniques that could almost be considered an endrenalon rush. But they were believable it is something you may see someone do in a circus or at a magic show.
in IJ Indiana, didn't have any super powered he was just creative, and resourceful and all the things he did were believable although probably nobody will survive it.
With all the special effects I feel we loose our emotional connection to the character we don't really care if he survives or not because we don't connect to the character they don't feel human they feel like a video game.
So Far the Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter seem like they are good movies. (Although there are a lot of effects in these movies you don't see Grandalf throwing huge fireballs all the time, or Harry Potter racing a pod or constantly doing all the over the edge magic tricks) they try to use special effect a little more responcibibly then some of the other movies (Hulk and Matrix 2 comes to mind) Effects are good and all but using effects for effects sakes doesn't make a good movie. Effects should be used to make the movie more believable and forget that the people in the movie are actors in an fictional environment. I think Forest Gump had the best special effects because most of them were seamless and we didn't even think that they were special effects.

slow release

[bongobongo]

the dvd set is way off.... november!! ?!?!? personally, i'm more excited about the version made by 12 year-olds anyway

Re:Milking the franchise..

[Bigby]

If you look at Clint Eastwood, he can still play great action characters. Great actors don't need to do difficult physical actions, even in an action movie.

Re:Milking the franchise..

[grub]

In a Eastwood flick (Bloodwork) he played an aging cop that had to go through a heart transplant. A bit more realistic than Harrison Ford one-handed swinging on vines in the jungle as he shoots the natives with his other hand.

Re:imdb forum

[TheKey]

The imdb forum, no offense, has got to be the filth of the Internet. It really boggles my brain every time I go there.

Incomplete DVD Set

[HisMother]

This seems to be a trend, as I'm sure y'all have noticed already: announce the latest in a series of movies, and simultaneously release a boxed set of DVDs of all the previous movies. The buzz about the upcoming movie sells the boxed set. After the next movie arrives, the boxed set is now incomplete, and you get a chance to sell a brand new boxed set to the believers. Pretty crappy if you ask me, but people apparently fall for it.

Re:Incomplete DVD Set

[indead]

Or... You could just buy the forth one seperately later.

Not everything is a conspiracy.

No! NO!

[MonkeyDluffy]

When was the last time Harrison Ford made a decent movie? I'm sorry, but the last few films he seemed to be just .... ordinary. While I love the Indiana Jones movies, I don't really want a new one that isn't in the same league as the first three.

-MDL

Re:Youth?

[Ratphace]

Personally, I would rather see the series retired before they bring in someone else.

Indiana Jones is not a "James Bond" type that you just pass the reigns on to. Harrison Ford will always be Indiana Jones, plain and simple.

I mean, they have kept the "timeline" of when the movie takes place moving, so it makes passing the reigns harder, whereas James Bond is a 'contemporary character' that is always just played in 'modern times' (i.e. when the file is shot to be in line with how we live our lives at that time).

But seeing the series retired after Harrison Ford retires from acting would be the right thing to do...

Maybe you forgot... HHGH !!!

[da5idnetlimit.com]

The hitch hicker guide to the galaxy /// A TRILOGY IN 5 PARTS ///

I hate those young techno punk that think they invented a new, but interesting problem...

Re:Maybe you forgot... HHGH !!!

[Anonymous Coward]

He didn't forget it! In fact, the quote "the increasingly inaccuratley named [x] trilogy" comes from the cover of the fifth book in Hitchhiker! Maybe you should read them one day?

Idea! lets have Indiana JUMP over a SHARK...

[dpbsmith]

The first three Star Wars movies were good, the first three James Bond movies were good, even the first three Rocky pictures were good...

To a true fan, nothing is sadder than the beloved series that goes on and on, becoming less good, then mediocre, then embarrasingly bad self-parody.

Because the true fan just has to keep watching them all, out of appreciation for what was and hoping against hope for what might be but almost never is.

Three cheers for the entertainers who remember the old show business maxim, "Always leave 'em wanting more."

Short Round != Jar-Jar

[HarveyBirdman]

Are you crazy? Short Round kicked ass! He was a competent getaway driver, a sneaky card cheat, was not intimidated by a beautiful grown woman, knew martial arts, had the guts to apply FIRE to someone else's gut when the situation called for it, knew when to use his tongue and when to hold it, and he saved Indiana by beating the tar out of the little royal kid messing with the bad juju voodoo.

On the rope bridge, Jar-Jar would have screamed and blubbered. Short Round quietly turned to Willie and said, "Hang on. We going for a ride." The kid had a set of balls on him, man.

If they had both been there, Short Round would kicked Jar-Jar off the bridge himself in the name of the mission.

Re:Short Round != Jar-Jar

[Ineffable 27]

Excellent points. Plus, there's the fact that Indy just trusted him totally, and you as the viewer accepted that.

Unlike the case of Jar Jar -- when Liam Neeson expresses confidence in Jar Jar, you're left scratching your head.

Re:Time to eat monkey brains again

[The Cydonian]

Not to mention, pluck out our side-kick's heart from his body while shouting Om Namah Sivay ;-).

Seriously folks, but the Temple of Doom has one of the worst portrayals of Indians ever on celluloid (which, if I'm not wrong, led to the movie being banned in India). I know it's all fiction, and certainly, I don't know if it's a cross-cultural over-reaction, but I think ToD was a simplistic, and a grossly overstated description of a complex set of cultural traditions and values. You know, the old Oh-The-Americans-Know-Nothing-But-Are-Loud-Mouthed routine... it comes from cultural objects like this.

The parent's point seems to be that most Indians can't stand the IJ universe, so to speak, because of this grotesque sequel.

Re:Youth?

[jgalun]

Indiana Jones is not a "James Bond" type that you just pass the reigns on to. Harrison Ford will always be Indiana Jones, plain and simple.

I hear what you are saying, but I would argue that James Bond is not a type that you can just pass the reigns on to either. None of the successors have come even close to having the charisma that Sean Connery did in the role. And without the incredible charisma (which is the same thing Harrison Ford provides to Indiana Jones), it's just a bunch of bad plots and gadgets...

Just my two cents.

Re:japanese ring because it is...

[cpt kangarooski]

However, I'm curious as to why a Chinese gangster in Shanghai would want a name that sounded even vaguely Japanese. Virtually everyone in China in the 1930's hated the Japanese, due to, you know, their ruthless and brutal invasion of China.

Racist of them all...

[Anonymous Coward]

Indiana Jones tells different story to different people. For the western audience, its fearless man in intruiging "savage" parts of the world, trying to collect powerful items. For the people in those parts of the world where this is all supposed to happen, its blasphemy,glorification of theft of their most sacred icons and last but not the least - racial insensitivity and "holier than thou" attitude on Jones' part.
Sure - Jones kicks Nazi butt and the evil monkey-eating Indian cult. But thats all dishing out misinformation and bias towards certain communities. For one thing - Nazis might be evil, but by trying to cultivate enmity against them by fabricating elaborate plots is doing the Nazi work ourselves. Indians have a permanent "snake charmer" impression on the west and monkey eating makes it worse.. the last time I checked, snake charming is not in the top 100 popular professions in India and they worship monkeys and respect them as much as they respect another human being.
If by telling these Jones' adventures on screen, Speilberg is trying to glorify the "explorers" - who were mostly murderous theives, then Lord save the sane world. Look at what spaniards did to native americans...