[ SECRET POST #3798 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3798 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.












Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 38 secrets from Secret Submission Post #544.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

I agree that you can - and should - make all of those movies. And I want to be clear that I'm not saying it would be bad to do them, or somehow against the spirit of Indiana Jones. I just... at that point, what actually does it gain by calling the character "Indiana Jones" instead of something else? At that point, it's just, like, kind of a meaningless tagline, if it's reduced to nothing more than just "person who goes to cool places to fight Nazis and get stuff". And I don't know what else there is to fit in there.

I mean, they could play into the academic stuff. I actually wish they'd had more of the academic stuff - I think one of the problems with Crystal Skull is that there's very little actual academic Smarty Pants Indy stuff in it. But at the same time, it's hardly an actual hallmark of the franchise, is it? Even in the first 3 movies, it's a fairly minor element.

*shrug* I just think it's harder than it seems to reboot Indiana Jones without turning it into a completely generic adventure movie or completely changing it. I'm not hostile to the idea, and even in the worst case scenario, I have no problem with them making more generic adventure movies, because I love adventure movies. I'm just saying. Star Wars seems wayyyyyy easier to reboot.

[(Anonymous)]

I guess we agree to disagree. If Star Wars could manage it - well, there's a lot more fandom nostalgia and peoples' childhoods at risk there, so any change is a huge deal. While I know people love the original Indiana Jones trilogy, I don't think there's quite the same baggage with that franchise.

"... at that point, what actually does it gain by calling the character "Indiana Jones" instead of something else?"

I'm not seeing this as an issue, mostly because you can say that about ANY reboot or continuation that occurs long after the original movies have finished, including Star Wars, Star Trek, Ghostbusters, etc. You don't have to reinvent the wheel each time, and I think any of the ideas I mentioned in my previous comment would be an interesting change... and that's enough for me.

[(Anonymous)]

I'm not seeing this as an issue, mostly because you can say that about ANY reboot or continuation that occurs long after the original movies have finished, including Star Wars, Star Trek, Ghostbusters, etc. You don't have to reinvent the wheel each time, and I think any of the ideas I mentioned in my previous comment would be an interesting change... and that's enough for me.

Well, but like... all of those reboots have really obvious answers to the question, "What makes this like Star Trek" (or Star Wars or Ghostbusters). And the point I'm making, and fair enough agree to disagree, is that I don't think the question "What makes this thing like Indiana Jones" is as easy to answer as you'd instinctively think. I guess.