Indiana Jones

18283858788199

Comments

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited July 2021 Posts: 16,427
    Denbigh wrote: »
    She could maybe be a journalist? And I do wonder if Indy will have two "sidekicks" in Phoebe and Boyd?

    I could certainly buy her as a journo, yeah.

    I'm getting the vibe that Holbrook is an antagonist; appears to be a cop or FBI sort of person? Seems to have a gun on his hip. I guess we'll see though.

    E6RV4EIWEAMCQeR?format=jpg&name=900x900

    E6RV4EGWYAQgzNA?format=jpg&name=900x900
  • mattjoesmattjoes Julie T. and the M.G.'s
    edited July 2021 Posts: 7,021
    Isn't that Owen Wilson from Loki?

    Also, Indiana Jones 5 makes me think of Men in Black 3.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    edited July 2021 Posts: 4,638
    mtm wrote: »
    PWB spotted :)

    E6RVe1WWEAY1S6E?format=jpg&name=small

    E6RVe06XsAA42jS?format=jpg&name=small

    Happy birthday PWB! Maybe she’s helping with the script, or her part.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited July 2021 Posts: 5,970
    Good catch @mtm, he very well could be. It would be smart, I think, to have the antagonists of the film be on both sides of the table in terms of nationality.

    Also just to add maybe Hoyd is CIA as I remember this rumour/leak/whatever it is...
    "Shaunette Renee Wilson will be playing Mads Mikkelsen’s villain’s CIA handler responsible for “babysitting” the Nazi scientist turned NASA recruit. There will also be a female villain, “an evil and brutal killer” who will work with Mads Mikkelsen’s character. According to our sources, Scarlett Johansson actually passed on this role previously."

    A bit confusing that they seem to suggest Shaunette and the female villain are separate characters - unless it's a mistake - which makes me think maybe they are the same character and Hoyd could be a "good" CIA agent who comes toe to toe with her.
  • DoctorNoDoctorNo USA-Maryland
    Posts: 755
    PWB does look good. Good costume design even though I didn't want late 60s.
  • Posts: 1,314
    This looks great. Really great.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    edited July 2021 Posts: 8,217
    Delete
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,217
    mtm wrote: »
    Oh I see. I doubt they'll use a green wall, because there doesn't seem to be one there :D I don't think they really have to- they can just paint in extra buildings where they need to.
    The thing which I guess won't look right is that very particular light you get in NYC where everything is lit from diffuse light coming directly from above because of the tall buildings. Light in a city with skyscrapers isn't like light anywhere else.

    Anyway, here's Mark Harmon Ford's stand-in on set:

    45444067-9788363-image-m-63_1626277398170.jpg?resize=470%2C490&ssl=1

    45443413-9788363-Busy_Director_James_Mangold_was_also_spotted_in_the_city_visitin-a-46_1626277232209.jpg?resize=708%2C486&ssl=1


    I’ve worked on several movie sets and seen many lighting stand ins, but this one appears to have registration dots. I wonder if this is an action sequence, a foot chase perhaps and this is a stunt performer
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,427
    Yes it's very curious, not sure if this related to Ford's injury or not- they don't appear to have been shooting any action today which would require a double. But to replace the face on a stand-in suggests he'll be close enough to the camera for it to see the dots, so effectively doing a bit which Ford would usually do.
    Ford was photographed in London yesterday so I didn't expect him to be on set, but I hope he is able to work on it at some point.
  • 007InAction007InAction Australia
    edited July 2021 Posts: 2,534
    Ford back in action soon....... 🙌
    Mqr6VL.gif
    GREAT actor 👍
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,427
    Very mild spoiler:
    It appears from what he's holding that Indy is, well, shall we call it 'retirement planning'?
    :D
    45446129-9788363-image-m-7_1626280809335.jpg
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,217
    The double’s physique is remarkably similar to Fords , even the way his legs bow a little. He is definitely more than a lighting stand-in.
  • Posts: 16,170
    Great photos. I'm getting more and more excited for this film each day.
  • Posts: 1,632
    But it's modern-day !!!! Ohhhh, I've got a bad feeling about this...
    And for those of you who'd point out it was many years ago, I'll just point out that sometimes in history things look relatively the same, and some times in history there's more change. So. For example: Think of how cars and clothing looked in the 1940s, compared with how they looked in the 1960s. Ok, now compare -- even though many more years have passed than just 20 -- 1960s cars and clothing with the present day. Sure, there are changes, but my point is this: Not. As. Different. As. The. First. Comparison. Part of the appeal of the Indy movies has been that they were set in earlier times, and looked it -- though, less so with the less entertaining IJATKOTCS (holy moly that's a mouthful). Let's please recall the fundamental concept which Lucas and Spielberg went for in the first place - to make something like the old adventure serials of the 1940s. Hell's bells, once you get to the late 1960s, the story may as well be focused on the next generation of Jones. I know, they went there a little bit in, oh, deep breath, IJATKOTCS, but it did not work out well. Furthermore, it did not make so much of a difference ! It added nothing much in terms of the adventure story. It reminds how in TV shows, when the show needs a boost, have the characters have a baby...after than little interest-booster, the shows usually piffle out pretty soon thereafter. OF COURSE, H Ford looks older and it must be dealt with somehow, but the time jump is pretty severe, and they might have gotten away with early 1960s. Oh, well...
  • mattjoesmattjoes Julie T. and the M.G.'s
    Posts: 7,021
    If you ask me right now, I would have preferred if the film had been set in the early sixties. But who knows, maybe when I watch it it'll come together for me and I won't be bothered by that. Let's see what they do! At any rate, I'm looking forward to it.
  • Posts: 3,276
    45444067-9788363-image-m-63_1626277398170.jpg?resize=470%2C490&ssl=1
    I get the registration dots for de-aging, but to me it makes no sense here for the 1969 sequence, unless the stand-in is a stunt-person, doing stuff that Ford isn't capable of.
  • Posts: 1,493
    Since62 wrote: »
    But it's modern-day !!!! Ohhhh, I've got a bad feeling about this...
    And for those of you who'd point out it was many years ago, I'll just point out that sometimes in history things look relatively the same, and some times in history there's more change. So. For example: Think of how cars and clothing looked in the 1940s, compared with how they looked in the 1960s. Ok, now compare -- even though many more years have passed than just 20 -- 1960s cars and clothing with the present day. Sure, there are changes, but my point is this: Not. As. Different. As. The. First. Comparison. Part of the appeal of the Indy movies has been that they were set in earlier times, and looked it -- though, less so with the less entertaining IJATKOTCS (holy moly that's a mouthful). Let's please recall the fundamental concept which Lucas and Spielberg went for in the first place - to make something like the old adventure serials of the 1940s. Hell's bells, once you get to the late 1960s, the story may as well be focused on the next generation of Jones. I know, they went there a little bit in, oh, deep breath, IJATKOTCS, but it did not work out well. Furthermore, it did not make so much of a difference ! It added nothing much in terms of the adventure story. It reminds how in TV shows, when the show needs a boost, have the characters have a baby...after than little interest-booster, the shows usually piffle out pretty soon thereafter. OF COURSE, H Ford looks older and it must be dealt with somehow, but the time jump is pretty severe, and they might have gotten away with early 1960s. Oh, well...

    We are assuming two time jumps; the film starts in the mid-'40s and then we jump to 1969 -- but what if there are 3 time jumps, open in the '40's with Nazi scenes - then we find Indy in early '60's at the start of the space race and that covers the major part of the plot, but something isn't fully resolved, and then we jump to '69 post moon landing for the final pay-off????

  • BennyBenny Shaken not stirredAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 15,138
    So long as these time jumps aren’t ‘time travel’ then I’ll be ok. If Indy goes time travelling then I’m out.

  • Posts: 121
    Benny wrote: »
    So long as these time jumps aren’t ‘time travel’ then I’ll be ok. If Indy goes time travelling then I’m out.
    I agree. Although I like time travel movies, I think time travel in an Indy film would be horrible. Then again, I am not worried the story will involve time travel as Indy 5 has competent screenwriters.
  • Posts: 1,493
    Benny wrote: »
    So long as these time jumps aren’t ‘time travel’ then I’ll be ok. If Indy goes time travelling then I’m out.

    Ah, I'm not suggesting time travel, just the story might take place over three time periods, rather than just the two, which we know about already;.

  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,217
    Zekidk wrote: »
    45444067-9788363-image-m-63_1626277398170.jpg?resize=470%2C490&ssl=1
    I get the registration dots for de-aging, but to me it makes no sense here for the 1969 sequence, unless the stand-in is a stunt-person, doing stuff that Ford isn't capable of.

    Yep, as I speculated earlier, it may be for some type of action sequence;, perhaps a foot chase where Indy is running after, or from someone.

    Or, they are simply doing what they need to do to keep production moving forward as Ford mends.

  • Posts: 9,848
    talos7 wrote: »
    The double’s physique is remarkably similar to Fords , even the way his legs bow a little. He is definitely more than a lighting stand-in.

    Well here's to swimming with bow legged women

    (sorry had to quote jaws)
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,217
    :))
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited July 2021 Posts: 5,970
    I very much doubt the story will take place over three time periods. And again I don't understand the desire for it not to take place in 1969. I'm sure Mangold and the writers have done everything they can to make it a great Indiana Jones movie set in 1969. It's not impossible to do so.
  • DenbighDenbigh UK
    edited July 2021 Posts: 5,970
    Antonio Banderas Latest Addition To Next Installment In Franchise

    https://deadline.com/2021/07/indiana-jones-5-antonio-banderas-1234793862/

    This cast is growing. It'll also be interesting to see how this role differentiates from his role in the upcoming Uncharted film, although he's probably the main villain there.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,188
    QONVIyz.gif
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    edited July 2021 Posts: 40,978
    @MakeshiftPython with a perfect response.

    Not that I needed another reason to check this out but there it is. I love Banderas' work so much.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,427
    Indy’s been riding a horse through a NYC parade today: I’m pretty happy with that :D
  • edited July 2021 Posts: 3,276
    It's good to see that good old Banderas, who has mostly been in low budget straight-to-dvd movies the last couple of decades, gets a shot at this. Nicolas Cage and Bruce Willis should be added also :-)
    mtm wrote: »
    Indy’s been riding a horse through a NYC parade today: I’m pretty happy with that :D

  • Maybe Antonio Banderas will play Mutt! :-? Haha
Sign In or Register to comment.