Safe to say in Hollywood originality isn’t a priority. Films are made to find creativity and show powerful presence between actors and the film’s plots. It is without question it’s not happening very much because of the damn reboots. Let’s face it, about 90-95% of the reboots made in the last 15 years are pretty terrible and make the originals look like Oscar Winners (ironically some of them are). Now granted the extreme few reboots are really well done and were better than the original. Superman for example was incredible and revolutionary in Storytelling of the Man Of Steel yet the reboot (wouldn’t really call it that) was much better, more dramatic and very different plot twists. Sadly not all reboots are created equal.
When it comes to Indiana Jones; the films and the actors it was epic classical filmmaking in every sense of the words. You had great action, phenomenal storytelling, well-known one-liners and each film gave incredible moments. I was born around the time Temple Of Doom came out and saw the first 3 films in the early 90’s so for most kids today who will never understand what it was like watching those films in the highest levels after the 80’s. These films alone are right up there with some of the greatest films in cinematic history and whoever says different doesn’t know a thing about great films. A reboot now or ever will not only disgrace its honorable name but will even trash its self for even trying to compete with the original.
I’m going to open minded for a second and look at this from another perspective. If by some miracle they got things setup for a reboot of one of the greatest franchises in history, who would play bad ass Indy? For starters if you did it right, you need an actor that isn’t young they need to be in their late 30’s or early 40’s, has some background In films that made an impact for that actor personally not professionally and you need someone that can deliver decent one-liners and be willing to get his hands a little dirty. You definitely need someone in shape (not bulky) but athletic. There have been 2 actors that have true potential and those are Nathan Fillion and Bradley Cooper. Here’s the breakdown of the pros and cons of both actors…..
Pro: Has charm
Con: Not the adventurous type (aside from Firefly)
Pro: Can deliver great one-liners very well
Con: Not build athletically but has potential
Pro: Has poise and the look
Con: below-average one-liner savy
Pro: High Potential as a Leading Man
Con: Doesn’t have much Action experience
These are my outlooks but Indy is a man’s man, he’s got great energy, charisma and can handle his own in a fight. Maybe not built like the average athlete but is in awesome shape. He can switch from adventurer to teacher in the blink of an eye. Both men have great potential no question.
Now getting away from the nerd side of me and onto the finish. If you’re going to create anything remote to an Indiana Jones film, don’t make the originals, there are plenty of stories to tell that haven’t been seen on the big screen. What happened around WWII that was between Crusade & Crystal Skull? How did Indy learn of Lo Che and his adventures with Han (The waiter with the gun)? A prequel 5 years before Temple Of Doom (story between 1930-34)? There are plenty of stories to be told that don’t need a reboot of Raiders or any of the original three. Study the adventures from books and even from the Young Indiana Jones series, they could easily show stories that happened after the series ended (in the timeline of Indy was 1920). I’m all for finding awesome stories to a world famous fictional character but don’t try to make a better Raiders because it’s not going to happen. Stories are meant to be told, not the same stories from a previous time period.