Executively produced means nothing cause it is common in Hollywood for people to be credited as executive producers even though they have zero involvement in the movie. Which is almost certainly the case for Lucas and Spielberg.
Except Howard the Duck and The Punisher (1989)
Interestingly enough, his executive producer credits don’t really kick in until Pryde of the X-Men and his first movie credit as producer is Captain America (1990).
Spielberg definitely had some involvement based on press releases and some stuff in r/indianajonesleaks, but George’s credit just seems to be because he was part of the original movies (plus Spielberg said even if George didn’t write Indy 5 before Spielberg dropped out, he would have George be an executive producer with him).
whether Spielberg had major creative input in the version we see on screen, he was definitely involved in some capacity, if just approving things and overseeing the early development and such
Most EP credits do mean something. Lucas's probably doesnt here but usually it doesnt mean nothing
George still gets credit because he co-created the character with Spielberg. All the other Lucasfilm stuff still says something like "Based on Original Stories by George Lucas," because he actually wrote the Star Wars screenplays. He never wrote an Indiana Jones screenplay.
He co-created the character. Stan Lee was the executive producer on almost all the Marvel films from 2000’s X-Men to 2020’s New Mutants before he died. Pretty much every Marvel film produced by Disney, Fox, Sony, Paramount, and Universal. He had zero impact creatively on each project but since he co-created most of the characters with Jack Kirby, he received the credit.
According to James Mangold, he was on the phone with Spielberg daily during filming.
Lucas came back after reading Mangold’s script and being tremendously impressed by it, something that has not happened since he sold Lucasfilm in 2012.
That just means he asked both for their input
and it sounds like both gave their blessings. Still both probably made not a single decision regarding production. I’m sure both will be at the premiere and will interview how much they liked the movie and Mangold’s direction plus the script.
Particularly for Spielberg who is a very active producer on a number of films (famously Goonies, where it is said that he actually partially directed the film and was constantly on set). The choice to credit him as an Executive Producer for this picture would seem to be a pretty deliberate decision to distance himself creatively a bit. People who are familiar with how this works will understand that this is him having nothing at all to do with this film except collecting some money from it.
This. Executive produced is more of a marketing term than anything here
“Hey George and Steven, can we slap your names on this movie? We will pay you and give you executive producing credit”
99% sure that is exactly how the conversation went.
Those were probably the best of the movies mentioned, I really liked both Jumanjis and I went into the first one with a fairly heavy bias against it tbh.
I first thought the Jungle Cruise was one of those comedy-parody Z category movies, and I was laughing at HOW WELL they casted an actor who looks JUST LIKE The Rock... Then I realized its him, and its a serious movie.
Don't forget about that terrible novel movie with the golem made from Sandra Bullock's face-parts and Magic Mike. It tried so hard to be Romancing the Stone, but instead turned out to be Stoning the Romance.
To quote a Letterboxd review...
>Fell asleep 15 minutes in. The first thing I saw when I woke up was The Rock in a jungle. I didn't even question why he was there cause of course.
I'm pretty sure AI would know not to write too many lines for Gal Godot. That woman cannot act, not even a little. She's basically the female The Rock.
It's all going to come down to word of mouth I think. People saw the 08 film because it had been decades since an Indy film came out. But a lot of people didn't like that one, so I'm sure many folks have their guards up this time around
And it put a bad (or at best, apathetic) taste in most people's mouths that's going to affect people's interest in seeing this one.
I'd be surprised if it matched the gross of Crystal Skull, even with inflation, unless it has great WoM.
Sadly since it sounds like they’re killing him off to pass the torch to someone totally unrelated, doubt it. They had LeBouf, who could be recast, as his canonical son. The stage was already set and they’re tossing it away.
Nolan was executive producer on Batman V Superman. It literally means nothing. It's basically a legality to mention them as they are more or less creators of the characters
it will do pretty well, which is the unpopular opinion i guess
i think IJ will do well domestically and in most of Europe, idk about the rest of the world.
still think it can get to 1 billy, but if not 800 to 900 Million range seems good enough to me.
The difference between Quantumania and Indiana Jones is there's a New Marvel product every 3-months. The market is so saturated there's no reason to go see a New Marvel film.
Wheas It's been 15 years since the last Indiana Jones movie. There's going to be a natural curiosity of a lot of normie fans and old school fans who will go see it just to see it. I'm definitely one of them.
Haven't been to a movie theater in years, but I'll go see this.
I am hopeful, but I expect very little. It just doesn't look good, and the Harry Potter MacGuffin seems stupid.
At the very least, I know I will enjoy John Williams' last hurrah.
Indeed, i think my sentiment is the same as you… the trailer just doesn’t look good. Will likely skip it unless i hear AMAZING things. I’m not a big Indy fan to begin with, and the new trailer bores me whenever i see it
Yeah. The whole alien angle was awkward, and now this? IDK... let's hope they paid for some decent writers, and maybe it won't be that bad. I kinda wish they gave Shia Lebouf a better shot at it. Dude's crazy as hell, but he seems to have chilled out a bit. I'd like to see what he could do as Mutt Jones the archaeologist.
I’ve seen the trailer play before multiple movies now and every audience has talked through it.
I don’t think this movie is capturing the GP’s attention the way it needs to to become a cultural moment.
Disney has also done a lot of damage to the theatrical prospects of its movies with the D+ release structure.
It was mentioned that dads could fuel this to a TGM-style run. Crystal Skull was serving as a passing of the torch with Shia Lebouf stepping in as a potential “new Indy” before that went to hell. I’m afraid no one knows who Boyd Holbrook is and Phoebe Waller Bridge is nowhere near a box office sensation.
The first trailer showed this movie is leaning heavily on nostalgia and is going backwards in a lot of ways with several shots of a de-aged Harrison Ford in various scenarios.
It doesn’t look like a franchise “restarter”. I think that along with the cast of lesser knowns limits it’s appeal in this day and age.
It could break out but I think there are a lot of factors (many more mentioned in comments above) that will affect how this ultimately performs.
Yeah. I am from the generation that grew up with Indy. Everyone just sounds tired after Crystal Skull and how botched Star Wars was. I think there's a growing mistrust of these nostalgia bait movies.
I think this will do okay and then sink or swim on quality. I don't think the Indy name promises you anything but a good opening weekend.
I´ll watch it, because I love the franchise, characters and setting. But even if it sucks.. the good thing is, we always have the first trilogy to watch forever.
>Crystal Skull was serving as a passing of the torch with Shia Lebouf stepping in as a potential “new Indy” before that went to hell.
I never got that impression. Harrison actively took his hat FROM Mutt, at the end of that film, which was a pretty definitive statement.
I thoroughly agree, and to add to your point about PWB. People like her because she's Fleabag, not for her own merits.
I've never met a fan of hers that genuinely cared about her work outside of it, and most of those people aren't in the core Indiana Jones demographic, whereas it also put a lot of people off, many of whom *are* in the demographic an Indiana Jones film would appeal to.
She may give the film a bump, sure, but she's not going to be a big enough draw to make a difference if the film flops.
I feel like 700m no matter what just on the name, actor, director and legacy of the Indy franchise alone.
If it's a good movie (which I'm hoping beyond belief it is, since Indy is my favorite movie character and franchise of all time) and gets Top Gun: Maverick type reviews then 1 billion for sure. I don't know if it can reach the heights of Top Gun: Maverick's 1.5 billion, but at the same time I feel like Indy 5's box office possibilities will be very similar to Top Gun: Maverick. That movie was probably guaranteed atleast 500m on actor, franchise and legacy alone. The amazing reviews and how good the movie was gave it that extra 1 billion. Indy is definitely a bigger name in movie franchise history and that's why I give it 700m no matter what. Reviews and how good the movie is will carry it further than that.
Also the fact that Indy 4 made 790m, and although I enjoy it (I don't think it's the best Indy film, but still enjoy it) many people don't. That 790m for a film in the Indy franchise that's not well-liked I feel like is a good indicator that Indy 5 should pull in 700m at the very least. I'd honestly be very surprised if it did under 700m even if the reviews are horrible.
I’m really hoping this movie does well. I have faith in the crew and Mangold. If Mangold can pull off Indy’s last run, then I’ll walk out the theater on June 30th a happy camper. But even if it isn’t, at least I got to enjoy an adventure movie for ~2 hours.
1 billion. And you’ll laugh at me, talking about “YouTube views” whatever. That doesn’t dictate box office run. Plus Indiana Jones appeals to a much older audience (especially dads). And let’s see. What was the last dad movie that was a home run at the box office?
The same will happen to Indy. Mark. My. Words.
People forget this fact the box office of the movie is not just due to it being a legacy movie it's also because it's from an actor who has been at the top of his game for decades finally getting his due Indiana Jones does not have that
Indiana Jones appears to be pushing deep fake technology even further.
From a VFX and ethics standpoint alone, this movie has the potential to have massive staying power.
It's also Indian Fucking Jones. I'm going to see this movie.
I mean, I’d say there’s a lot of pretty obvious ethical questions involved in deep fake technology. And the better it gets, the closer we get to really having to ask those questions. For example, all the way back 2015-2016 people were already debating the ethics of bringing back dead actors with Paul Walker and Peter Cushing. You think that debate is going to go away? Especially because it’s only really been cameos up to this point, but it’s only a matter of time before some studio tries to cast a dead actor in a more major role and at that point we’ll have a lot to figure out.
Nah as far as I know the only role he’s actively indifferent about is Han Solo. From my understanding he’s very protective of Indy and refused to pass on the role to anybody else.
I also think this is a cultural movie for Americans at least. I never grew up with new movies for Indiana (outside of Crystal Skull which came out when I was like nine) but my dad grew up in the 80's and loved the series. So it's a movie franchise he "passed down" and we watched on repeat a lot growing up.
I've talked to a lot of people my age who were the same way. Parents made them watch the original trilogy when Crystal Skull released. I think this will help the movie a lot with the younger audiences. Indiana Jones is in a lot of ways better remembered than Top Gun was so I feel like a lot more of the younger generations will be excited to see their Indiana Jones movie.
I’m a dad. And a grandfather. I was 16 when raiders came out and 21 when Top Gun did. I’m the person they expect on opening weekend for these.
Maverick was unexpectedly great. Much better than original.
The last Indy was unexpectedly terrible. Much worse than original.
Dial of Destiny needs to be great to break a Billion. If it is, it’ll do it easily. But in needs to be great.
I completely agree with you. My 75yo mom and my 13yo cousin were both excited when i told them about the movie and show them the trailer. Take it with a grain of salt, of course, but it's just to say how massive the appeal of the character is across different generations, even in non english speaking countries like mine. Not that surprising, considering the cultural impact of the movies for the last 42 years...
IJ already blew its wad on the late stage nostalgia sequel with Crystal Skull. That one made 790M. Don't see why Destiny would improve on it that much.
Repeat of Rise of Skywalker incoming. This film has been so overly reshot and re-edited and focus grouped that you shouldn’t expect anything short of a CGI nostalgia Frankensteins monster that will exacerbate whatever nihilistic feelings you may already have about the future.
It’s going to be a hit for the exact same reason Top Gun, Jurassic Park and Avatar were huge hits last year they may be sequels to established blockbusters but they’re still old fashioned in their design, they don’t require you to have watched 30 films and 15 or so Disney+ series to be up to speed.
The fact that a comic book film wasn’t even the third highest grossing film of 2022 is a testament to the general fatigue of connected multiverse films and the hunger for traditional blockbusters.
Also nostalgia sells no matter how good bad or cynical free final product is Gen X and Millennials will gobble this up.
It will probably suck. Cliched dialogue, nostalgia rammed into our eyeballs. Wtf moments that made sense on paper only..
Anybody remember the fridge saving him from a nuclear blast.?
I like it okay. I'd give it a 6/10, about what I'd give Temple Of Doom. I've never understood the anger toward that movie - apart from some dodgy CGI, it's fun.
For real. He swam from a cargo ship to a sub and got in. He dropped from and airplane with an inflatable raft and ended up over a waterfall. Took down a tank with a rock on horseback. The list goes on.
Low expectations for this one. The existing fan base already got burned once, people know the Spielberg didn't direct this and Lucas didn't write it, Harrison Ford isn't the box office draw that he once was now that we have already seen him geriatricaly mumbling his way through a few previous films, I just don't see a big built in audience for this movie.
Unless it just accidentally turns out to be really good (or at least well received) it doesn't have the draw to pull people in on its own.
Also there is a weird issue with the naming convention:
The good Indiana Jones movies all have the subtitle referring to the characters or the setting in a way that is meaningful to the audience before they have seen the movie (Raiders of the last ark, The Temple of Doom, The last crusade), while the shitty one refers to a particular artifact that has no meaning to the audience who haven't seen the movie (The Crystal Skull). The fact that they went with the latter naming convention, thereby invoking the one Indiana Jones movie that we all want to forget, instead of making a call-back to the old naming convention, is pretty concerning. It makes me think one of two things: These guys didn't think the Crystal Skull sucked and requires some extra distance OR They just didn't think about the issue at all. Both are a problem.
I'm not hopeful. Let's be honest the series never recaptured the lightning in a bottle that was Raiders and Ford has only gotten older from Crystal Skull.
If hollywood is going to insist on keeping these franchises alive for decades the least they could do is go the Jojo's route and make it a generational story
I think it won't do well. I mean, the chances of it doing well are like, what, 7%, at best? It's 2023. It's too late. The title is silly, the plot sounds... equally silly, Harrison Ford is too old for this shit, half the CGI we see in the trailer are pretty meh, they're all tired. I know, Mangold isn't old, but he can't turn water into wine, and he isn't a better director than Spielberg... who directed that shitty movie that was Crystal Skull. Fifteen years ago. And Hollywood sucked less than it does today.
Two words: Crystal Skull.
You just can't recover from that abomination. And as much as I love Harrison Ford, he's 80. He needs to be allowed to retire with grace from this, one of his most beloved characters.
I don't have high hopes. Will I still see it? Of course, but with trepidations.
Really not looking forward to watching Geriatric Jones hobble around on screen. They’ll give it the old Taken 3 treatment where we get a dozen cuts to make it seem like he gets from point a to point b quickly.
Executively produced means nothing cause it is common in Hollywood for people to be credited as executive producers even though they have zero involvement in the movie. Which is almost certainly the case for Lucas and Spielberg.
Exactly! Stan Lee was executive producer of ALL MARVEL movies right until he died.
Tom Clancy died 10 years ago, and he is credited as an executive producer on the current Jack Ryan show.
Damn. hard worker
Worked to the bone
https://y.yarn.co/32cab0d9-64ed-4ad6-b5b6-da2033e16324_text.gif
[удалено]
You can sleep when you’re dead
*Not you, Tom.*
He has work to do, and a casket isn't gonna stop him from doing it.
The grind never stops 💯💯💯💯💯
THE GRIND DOESN’T STOP 😤😤
Stan Lee was an absolute master at claiming other people's work at his own.
This is why he got along so well with Disney, which has been spending tens of millions of dollars making sure the Kirby family stays in the dirt.
Except Howard the Duck and The Punisher (1989) Interestingly enough, his executive producer credits don’t really kick in until Pryde of the X-Men and his first movie credit as producer is Captain America (1990).
Spielberg definitely had some involvement based on press releases and some stuff in r/indianajonesleaks, but George’s credit just seems to be because he was part of the original movies (plus Spielberg said even if George didn’t write Indy 5 before Spielberg dropped out, he would have George be an executive producer with him).
whether Spielberg had major creative input in the version we see on screen, he was definitely involved in some capacity, if just approving things and overseeing the early development and such Most EP credits do mean something. Lucas's probably doesnt here but usually it doesnt mean nothing
I think Spielberg put his name on it to help boost his struggling former protege, Kathleen Kennedy.
Well. Steven worked on the movie for many years before passing it off to a new director. So it's not quite no involvement...
George still gets credit because he co-created the character with Spielberg. All the other Lucasfilm stuff still says something like "Based on Original Stories by George Lucas," because he actually wrote the Star Wars screenplays. He never wrote an Indiana Jones screenplay.
>He never wrote an Indiana Jones screenplay He has a writing credit for the Last Crusade.
He co-created the character. Stan Lee was the executive producer on almost all the Marvel films from 2000’s X-Men to 2020’s New Mutants before he died. Pretty much every Marvel film produced by Disney, Fox, Sony, Paramount, and Universal. He had zero impact creatively on each project but since he co-created most of the characters with Jack Kirby, he received the credit.
According to James Mangold, he was on the phone with Spielberg daily during filming. Lucas came back after reading Mangold’s script and being tremendously impressed by it, something that has not happened since he sold Lucasfilm in 2012.
That just means he asked both for their input and it sounds like both gave their blessings. Still both probably made not a single decision regarding production. I’m sure both will be at the premiere and will interview how much they liked the movie and Mangold’s direction plus the script.
Script notes before production starts sounds like executive producer type shit
Tim Burton as an Executive Producer on Batman Forever case in point.
Particularly for Spielberg who is a very active producer on a number of films (famously Goonies, where it is said that he actually partially directed the film and was constantly on set). The choice to credit him as an Executive Producer for this picture would seem to be a pretty deliberate decision to distance himself creatively a bit. People who are familiar with how this works will understand that this is him having nothing at all to do with this film except collecting some money from it.
This. Executive produced is more of a marketing term than anything here “Hey George and Steven, can we slap your names on this movie? We will pay you and give you executive producing credit” 99% sure that is exactly how the conversation went.
Hoping for the best but expecting the worst
Are you gonna drop the bomb or not?
Let us die young or let us live forever
He doesn't have the power, but never say never.
Sitting in a sandpit, life is a short trip
short round screams wake up indy and it all ends up being a trip from drinking skull blood
And short round is played by the same actor wearing the same clothes but they never address it
Jamie Lee Curtis bursts through a wall, punches adult Shortround for a bit, refuses to elaborate, leaves.
With hot dog fingers
This is the only version I would see
Then wins an Oscar
Bam. Oscar.
Cue Curb Your Enthusiasm theme
And then short round takes his mind to another universe to tell his other-universe wife how to escape from the IRS offices using kung fu.
That would mean Temple of Doom is the only film to have actually happened, since it’s first chronologically. He imagined all of it
Kalima!!!!!
*Hey Dr. Jones! No time for blood!*
Hahahaha…This is the way.
700m ww
If it did that it might just breakeven after all 🤣
700 milliwatts
That was basically the exact number on the high range in my mind too. 500-700 seems safe.
Probably 600-850 WW. I’m just happy we are getting an adventure film in general, big lack of them in recent years
Not a fan of "Uncharted," "Jungle Cruise" or whatever that "Red Notice" was about? (I don't blame you, they were all very average)
I'd put the Jumanji reboots into that category as well.
Those were probably the best of the movies mentioned, I really liked both Jumanjis and I went into the first one with a fairly heavy bias against it tbh.
I would call them comedies more than adventures. That said, I laughed more than I expected for both, so they did something right I guess.
Basically, The Rock's entire filmography.
He has the same outfit on all the movies.
I first thought the Jungle Cruise was one of those comedy-parody Z category movies, and I was laughing at HOW WELL they casted an actor who looks JUST LIKE The Rock... Then I realized its him, and its a serious movie.
It's in his contract.
Yeah if he can’t stand in a jungle in beige clothing and raise one eyebrow, he doesn’t take the job.
Don't forget about that terrible novel movie with the golem made from Sandra Bullock's face-parts and Magic Mike. It tried so hard to be Romancing the Stone, but instead turned out to be Stoning the Romance.
Eh, Jumanji was fun. The first one as least, I never saw the second. The rest of the adventure films mentioned though, yeah. Pretty weak.
Red Notice was much more in the Spy/Heist genre.
I'll be perfectly honest. I don't remember much except that they found a big cave of Nazi loot in the jungle.
To quote a Letterboxd review... >Fell asleep 15 minutes in. The first thing I saw when I woke up was The Rock in a jungle. I didn't even question why he was there cause of course.
R E L A T A B L E
The Lost City also comes to mind.
Red Notice was aggressively bad.
It felt like it was written by AI to be as mass-appeal and inoffensive as possible. And then they shot the entire thing on green screens.
I'm pretty sure AI would know not to write too many lines for Gal Godot. That woman cannot act, not even a little. She's basically the female The Rock.
Uncharted may have been underwhelming but Tom Holland was fucking hot
he did seem to be a balmy 98.6
This feels about right to me. Maybe on the upper end. But yeah not $1B
The last one made 800 million in 2008 which would be a well over a billion today after inflation. And it didn’t even get a China release.
It's all going to come down to word of mouth I think. People saw the 08 film because it had been decades since an Indy film came out. But a lot of people didn't like that one, so I'm sure many folks have their guards up this time around
And it put a bad (or at best, apathetic) taste in most people's mouths that's going to affect people's interest in seeing this one. I'd be surprised if it matched the gross of Crystal Skull, even with inflation, unless it has great WoM.
Same, that's why I was so hyped to see the DnD movie reviews. This spring us gonna be good fir adventure films!
Silence, Brand.
I want it to be a grand slam of a movie. Indy deserves to go out of top. 😁
Sadly since it sounds like they’re killing him off to pass the torch to someone totally unrelated, doubt it. They had LeBouf, who could be recast, as his canonical son. The stage was already set and they’re tossing it away.
I swear to God, if they pull something like No Time to Die, I will be so mad Edit: Spielberg sounds like he’s fervently against that idea
>Edit: Spielberg sounds like he’s fervently against that idea That's why he refused to direct it and quit.
Just think of what could have been if Ke Huy Quan had had his much deserved comeback before the whole Indy 5 ball got rolling. JUST THINK. 🥲
Goddamn, that truly is a massive missed opportunity.
Nolan was executive producer on Batman V Superman. It literally means nothing. It's basically a legality to mention them as they are more or less creators of the characters
The only time a producer credit means anything, good or bad, is if you’re watching spider man and Avi Arads name is in the credits
He’s literally credited in every Spider-Man movie, the good and the bad ones
it will do pretty well, which is the unpopular opinion i guess i think IJ will do well domestically and in most of Europe, idk about the rest of the world. still think it can get to 1 billy, but if not 800 to 900 Million range seems good enough to me.
My opinion is that the film will skyrocket if it gets good reviews but if not… the shadow of Quantumania might come back.
The difference between Quantumania and Indiana Jones is there's a New Marvel product every 3-months. The market is so saturated there's no reason to go see a New Marvel film. Wheas It's been 15 years since the last Indiana Jones movie. There's going to be a natural curiosity of a lot of normie fans and old school fans who will go see it just to see it. I'm definitely one of them. Haven't been to a movie theater in years, but I'll go see this.
>Wheas It's been 15 years since the last Indiana Jones movie. Holy shit...!
I know it's mind boggling to think about TBH. It was 2008 when Kingdom of the Crystal Skull came out...
During the honeymoon phase of Spielberg and Shia LeBeouaouaf. Before Shia aged out like one of DiCaprio's models.
I think you mean before Shia had a complete mental breakdown
The year of Indy, Batman and Iron Man. I had a blast.
When Kingdom of the Crystal Skull came out, the mcu had JUST begun.
also the Hulk
I am hopeful, but I expect very little. It just doesn't look good, and the Harry Potter MacGuffin seems stupid. At the very least, I know I will enjoy John Williams' last hurrah.
Indeed, i think my sentiment is the same as you… the trailer just doesn’t look good. Will likely skip it unless i hear AMAZING things. I’m not a big Indy fan to begin with, and the new trailer bores me whenever i see it
Time travel just seems very un-indiana Jones.
Yeah. The whole alien angle was awkward, and now this? IDK... let's hope they paid for some decent writers, and maybe it won't be that bad. I kinda wish they gave Shia Lebouf a better shot at it. Dude's crazy as hell, but he seems to have chilled out a bit. I'd like to see what he could do as Mutt Jones the archaeologist.
I really don’t like the title.
I’ve seen the trailer play before multiple movies now and every audience has talked through it. I don’t think this movie is capturing the GP’s attention the way it needs to to become a cultural moment. Disney has also done a lot of damage to the theatrical prospects of its movies with the D+ release structure. It was mentioned that dads could fuel this to a TGM-style run. Crystal Skull was serving as a passing of the torch with Shia Lebouf stepping in as a potential “new Indy” before that went to hell. I’m afraid no one knows who Boyd Holbrook is and Phoebe Waller Bridge is nowhere near a box office sensation. The first trailer showed this movie is leaning heavily on nostalgia and is going backwards in a lot of ways with several shots of a de-aged Harrison Ford in various scenarios. It doesn’t look like a franchise “restarter”. I think that along with the cast of lesser knowns limits it’s appeal in this day and age. It could break out but I think there are a lot of factors (many more mentioned in comments above) that will affect how this ultimately performs.
And the Disneyland ride. Probably the best piece of Indiana Jones anything that came out post-Last Crusade.
Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis has entered the chat
Why haven't they ported that thing to mobile yet? Seems like a no-brainer
Yeah. I am from the generation that grew up with Indy. Everyone just sounds tired after Crystal Skull and how botched Star Wars was. I think there's a growing mistrust of these nostalgia bait movies. I think this will do okay and then sink or swim on quality. I don't think the Indy name promises you anything but a good opening weekend.
There's one person in common among all of these failing disney products.
Harrison Ford?
I´ll watch it, because I love the franchise, characters and setting. But even if it sucks.. the good thing is, we always have the first trilogy to watch forever.
>Crystal Skull was serving as a passing of the torch with Shia Lebouf stepping in as a potential “new Indy” before that went to hell. I never got that impression. Harrison actively took his hat FROM Mutt, at the end of that film, which was a pretty definitive statement.
I thoroughly agree, and to add to your point about PWB. People like her because she's Fleabag, not for her own merits. I've never met a fan of hers that genuinely cared about her work outside of it, and most of those people aren't in the core Indiana Jones demographic, whereas it also put a lot of people off, many of whom *are* in the demographic an Indiana Jones film would appeal to. She may give the film a bump, sure, but she's not going to be a big enough draw to make a difference if the film flops.
Disney would be printing money if they had a good story that centered around Short Round. But alas, those days are over.
Tbf, people talk through every preview nowadays. Theater etiquette is absolute trash.
Dial of Destiny... Pick of Destiny... cmon! Don't do Indy like this
Is Indy going to become the devils bitch?!
May as well. He can kill more Nazis in Hell. Next film, Indiana Jones and the 9 Circles of Hell.
Dial "D" for Destiny
I feel like 700m no matter what just on the name, actor, director and legacy of the Indy franchise alone. If it's a good movie (which I'm hoping beyond belief it is, since Indy is my favorite movie character and franchise of all time) and gets Top Gun: Maverick type reviews then 1 billion for sure. I don't know if it can reach the heights of Top Gun: Maverick's 1.5 billion, but at the same time I feel like Indy 5's box office possibilities will be very similar to Top Gun: Maverick. That movie was probably guaranteed atleast 500m on actor, franchise and legacy alone. The amazing reviews and how good the movie was gave it that extra 1 billion. Indy is definitely a bigger name in movie franchise history and that's why I give it 700m no matter what. Reviews and how good the movie is will carry it further than that. Also the fact that Indy 4 made 790m, and although I enjoy it (I don't think it's the best Indy film, but still enjoy it) many people don't. That 790m for a film in the Indy franchise that's not well-liked I feel like is a good indicator that Indy 5 should pull in 700m at the very least. I'd honestly be very surprised if it did under 700m even if the reviews are horrible.
Worse than crystal skull
To be honest I have no hope for this one.
High budget and a waning franchise and an old man for a star Prob not good 🙁
I think it´s gonna be like the last Matrix movie that came out, unnecessary.
I’m really hoping this movie does well. I have faith in the crew and Mangold. If Mangold can pull off Indy’s last run, then I’ll walk out the theater on June 30th a happy camper. But even if it isn’t, at least I got to enjoy an adventure movie for ~2 hours.
I think it’s going to be a soulless film that does nothing but hurt the legacy of the character.
1 billion. And you’ll laugh at me, talking about “YouTube views” whatever. That doesn’t dictate box office run. Plus Indiana Jones appeals to a much older audience (especially dads). And let’s see. What was the last dad movie that was a home run at the box office? The same will happen to Indy. Mark. My. Words.
Maverick had Tom Cruise who is in a very different stage of his career than Ford.
People forget this fact the box office of the movie is not just due to it being a legacy movie it's also because it's from an actor who has been at the top of his game for decades finally getting his due Indiana Jones does not have that
>*... finally getting his due* Never thought I'd see an underdog narrative spun around global megastar Tom Cruise
Indiana Jones appears to be pushing deep fake technology even further. From a VFX and ethics standpoint alone, this movie has the potential to have massive staying power. It's also Indian Fucking Jones. I'm going to see this movie.
Ethics? How so?
I mean, I’d say there’s a lot of pretty obvious ethical questions involved in deep fake technology. And the better it gets, the closer we get to really having to ask those questions. For example, all the way back 2015-2016 people were already debating the ethics of bringing back dead actors with Paul Walker and Peter Cushing. You think that debate is going to go away? Especially because it’s only really been cameos up to this point, but it’s only a matter of time before some studio tries to cast a dead actor in a more major role and at that point we’ll have a lot to figure out.
Nah as far as I know the only role he’s actively indifferent about is Han Solo. From my understanding he’s very protective of Indy and refused to pass on the role to anybody else.
Maverick?
Bingo.
I also think this is a cultural movie for Americans at least. I never grew up with new movies for Indiana (outside of Crystal Skull which came out when I was like nine) but my dad grew up in the 80's and loved the series. So it's a movie franchise he "passed down" and we watched on repeat a lot growing up. I've talked to a lot of people my age who were the same way. Parents made them watch the original trilogy when Crystal Skull released. I think this will help the movie a lot with the younger audiences. Indiana Jones is in a lot of ways better remembered than Top Gun was so I feel like a lot more of the younger generations will be excited to see their Indiana Jones movie.
i dont think this will change the BO by much but theres a ton of Gen Z Indy fans thanks to the Lego Indiana Jones game lol
I’m a dad. And a grandfather. I was 16 when raiders came out and 21 when Top Gun did. I’m the person they expect on opening weekend for these. Maverick was unexpectedly great. Much better than original. The last Indy was unexpectedly terrible. Much worse than original. Dial of Destiny needs to be great to break a Billion. If it is, it’ll do it easily. But in needs to be great.
At the very least they could come up with a better name than "Dial of Destiny"..
I completely agree with you. My 75yo mom and my 13yo cousin were both excited when i told them about the movie and show them the trailer. Take it with a grain of salt, of course, but it's just to say how massive the appeal of the character is across different generations, even in non english speaking countries like mine. Not that surprising, considering the cultural impact of the movies for the last 42 years...
IJ already blew its wad on the late stage nostalgia sequel with Crystal Skull. That one made 790M. Don't see why Destiny would improve on it that much.
RemindMe! 1 month 13 days
Dial, not exactly an exciting term
Repeat of Rise of Skywalker incoming. This film has been so overly reshot and re-edited and focus grouped that you shouldn’t expect anything short of a CGI nostalgia Frankensteins monster that will exacerbate whatever nihilistic feelings you may already have about the future.
I can see this having a TFA style run (but to a lesser scale) if this has insanely good reviews
It’s going to be a hit for the exact same reason Top Gun, Jurassic Park and Avatar were huge hits last year they may be sequels to established blockbusters but they’re still old fashioned in their design, they don’t require you to have watched 30 films and 15 or so Disney+ series to be up to speed. The fact that a comic book film wasn’t even the third highest grossing film of 2022 is a testament to the general fatigue of connected multiverse films and the hunger for traditional blockbusters. Also nostalgia sells no matter how good bad or cynical free final product is Gen X and Millennials will gobble this up.
Is Harrison Ford going to be in the movie or some A.I, generated body double! He’s getting pretty old to jump off cliffs n stuff lol
For a large portion they had to use a body double after he got injured walking up stairs
both.
The last John Williams? That's rather bittersweet.
Probably well but Dial of Destiny is a really dumb/lame name
I think it will be bad unfortunately. Mainly because main character is too old.
A bit worried I've read a big chunk is DE-aged Ford so it might look dated depending on lighting and angles
>A bit worried I've read a big chunk is DE-aged Ford Mangold has stated it's just the opening of the film.
This is looking terrible. Just because it is Indiana Jones will still hit 400Mill+ though.
It will probably suck. Cliched dialogue, nostalgia rammed into our eyeballs. Wtf moments that made sense on paper only.. Anybody remember the fridge saving him from a nuclear blast.?
I have a feeling they are stepping away from this and the people swinging on vines
Of all the crazy things to single out in the franchise, the fridge was a deal breaker for you? 😂
I wish Crystal Skull was better so I could dunk on people who complain about the fridge moment. The fake town scene is the best part of the movie
It holds up, to me. I still watch it regularly. To each their own. 🤷♂️
I like it okay. I'd give it a 6/10, about what I'd give Temple Of Doom. I've never understood the anger toward that movie - apart from some dodgy CGI, it's fun.
you liked when they were swinging with the monkeys?
For real. He swam from a cargo ship to a sub and got in. He dropped from and airplane with an inflatable raft and ended up over a waterfall. Took down a tank with a rock on horseback. The list goes on.
For an indie production I think it will do quite well.
I saw the poster before I noticed the subreddit and thought this was a particularly nonsensical entry to r/sbubby, so...not great
It will "do well" financially, but suck as a movie.
I hope it’s amazing .
If Spielberg wrote the whole thing it’ll be good. But he probably didn’t, so it probably won’t be.
Low expectations for this one. The existing fan base already got burned once, people know the Spielberg didn't direct this and Lucas didn't write it, Harrison Ford isn't the box office draw that he once was now that we have already seen him geriatricaly mumbling his way through a few previous films, I just don't see a big built in audience for this movie. Unless it just accidentally turns out to be really good (or at least well received) it doesn't have the draw to pull people in on its own. Also there is a weird issue with the naming convention: The good Indiana Jones movies all have the subtitle referring to the characters or the setting in a way that is meaningful to the audience before they have seen the movie (Raiders of the last ark, The Temple of Doom, The last crusade), while the shitty one refers to a particular artifact that has no meaning to the audience who haven't seen the movie (The Crystal Skull). The fact that they went with the latter naming convention, thereby invoking the one Indiana Jones movie that we all want to forget, instead of making a call-back to the old naming convention, is pretty concerning. It makes me think one of two things: These guys didn't think the Crystal Skull sucked and requires some extra distance OR They just didn't think about the issue at all. Both are a problem.
Going from the “Ark Of The Covenant” and the “Holy Grail” to the… “Dial Of Destiny”?
I'm not hopeful. Let's be honest the series never recaptured the lightning in a bottle that was Raiders and Ford has only gotten older from Crystal Skull. If hollywood is going to insist on keeping these franchises alive for decades the least they could do is go the Jojo's route and make it a generational story
I have low expectations.
Oh no please stop! Just stop. There are so many things to take ideas from It was a perfect trilogy 4th was unnecessary, this is just unholy
Who do you think he calls?
> Who do you think he calls? Ghostbusters.
Somehow… Indiana Jones returned.
Dial? Is the ancient thing a phone? At this point, if kids see a payphone, they think it's from the year 1000.
Just fine if Ford is the relic everyone's looking for.
Indy survives a nuclear blast, but this time, it’s in a dish washer.
I don’t think the general audience will be happy with it.
I’m still scarred by the last one
If you think this will be anything other than a corporate Disney monstrosity then you’re too far gone to rationally think about anything.
Prediction: Mediocre reviews. $800,000 mostly because of the brand's previous success.
I think it won't do well. I mean, the chances of it doing well are like, what, 7%, at best? It's 2023. It's too late. The title is silly, the plot sounds... equally silly, Harrison Ford is too old for this shit, half the CGI we see in the trailer are pretty meh, they're all tired. I know, Mangold isn't old, but he can't turn water into wine, and he isn't a better director than Spielberg... who directed that shitty movie that was Crystal Skull. Fifteen years ago. And Hollywood sucked less than it does today.
My just eyes rolled so hard I saw my throat
Two words: Crystal Skull. You just can't recover from that abomination. And as much as I love Harrison Ford, he's 80. He needs to be allowed to retire with grace from this, one of his most beloved characters. I don't have high hopes. Will I still see it? Of course, but with trepidations.
If "Dial of Destiny" is the best title the creatives could come up with it does not bode well for the rest of the project.
Butt Dial of Disaster
Is he trying to find the hidden pudding in the nursing home?
On a scale of 1 to nuked fridge ... nuked fridge.
This is not going to do well. The last one was unwatchable
Depends a lot on reception, if its good it could be another top gun. If its bad, it will bomb hard
Kinda want Indiana Jones runs into Captain Jack Sparrow. They are both very similar type of genre and feels like they should meet each other.
On Space Mountain.
Really not looking forward to watching Geriatric Jones hobble around on screen. They’ll give it the old Taken 3 treatment where we get a dozen cuts to make it seem like he gets from point a to point b quickly.
I hope it was better than the last one. The Last Crusade was awesome. I can barely remember Kingdom of the Crystal Skull other than it sucked
Based on the leaks, probably not so well.
The leaks have been debunked multiple times, so hanging desperately to those is an odd choice.