Saturday, June 23, 2007

The Man In The Hat Is Back

He's back. Several of you scoffed and said it would never happen, but Harrison Ford has once again donned the beat up hat and leather jacket. Don't believe it? Take a peek at this site:http://www.indianajones.com/community/news/news20070621.html

This picture, snapped by Spielberg himself is on the website, which features snippets of information about the project, which has already begun production and will hopefully be released within the next year.

25 comments:

SQT said...

Oh Yeah! I am so excited about this!

DesLily said...

heart be still.. sigh..

the young folks may think Harrison is toooooo Ooooold to be an action hero... to me it just proves you aren't "dead" because you are "old"! Sorry.. he's still handsome to me, and he IS Indy!

Crunchy Carpets said...

Sorry..being that the last two were total crap... and I WAS the biggest Indy/Harrison fan ever....I have NOOOO excitement for this at all

Stewart Sternberg said...

I look at Crunchy and think: "The last two crap?" Sean Connery? I don't believe my ears. Maybe she's thinking of another film. Yeah, that would make more sense.

SQT said...

Sorry Crunchy, I can't agree either. I love Indy.

pussreboots said...

Yay yay yay! The on again off again film is back on. Woohoo!

Jon the Intergalactic Gladiator said...

Yeah, Indy may be getting on in the years, but he had some of that Holy Grail water so he should be OK to go, right?

I am excited to see this as well. I always loved these movies.

I just hope this doesn't turn out like the new Star Wars trilogy.

Crunchy Carpets said...

Oh people...people sigh....
How can you compare Raiders to the other two.

From a homage to the oldies with a gritty but fun hero with a dark side. From a past love who is as tough as he is....

To a guy who suddenly likes KIDS, screaming women and then let us chuck in some slapstick and over play gags that were cute in the first one and not so much anymore.

Especially when the crack TEAM who brought you the first film are no longer involved.

The second movie insulted my intelligence and patience and the third was mildly amusing.

And again...I cannot stress what (past tense) huge fan I was.

My room was a Raiders Shrine.

I adored Harrison Ford.

I got smart....and I expected more.

I am not excited about this.

SQT said...

((thinking))

Nope. Still like Indy just fine.

But I don't have the insider's disgust for George Lucas that tends to taint the enjoyment of anything he touches.

Stewart Sternberg said...

I agree Crunch..the second film was ghastly, but the third..the third was superb. I remember the opening, the young Indiana (played by River Phoenix) as he attempted to liberate the cross...the snakes, the whip, the origin of the scar. It was beautifully handled. So was the father/son relationship between Connery and Ford.

SQT said...

To be fair, I remember thinking Kate Capshaw was annoying as Hell in the second Indy film. But the thing is, I'm a sucker for Harrison Ford in the role. I enjoy the character so much that I can pretty much enjoy anything that features him. I feel the same way about Sean Connery most of the time too, and he's been in some terrible movies.

Alex said...

No Connery, but still...


The theme song's going to be in my head from now until the day the film comes out!

Crunchy Carpets said...

"young Indiana (played by River Phoenix) as he attempted to liberate the cross...the snakes, the whip, the origin of the scar. It was beautifully handled. So was the father/son relationship between Connery and Ford."

hated it..I hate when people try to cutify things and wrap it all up with a cute bow..

I kept thinking of the movies these were supposed to 'mimic' and cannot imagine them doing a cutesy origin tale for Chuck Heston in Secret of the Incas (as adventurer Harry Steele, on the trail of an ancient Incan artifact. sound familiar??).

And this has nothing to do with my distaste for Lucas (or Speilberg)...Raiders -film wise -was a flawless film. Well tooled story, characters developed but still mysterious, a story that harkened back to the 50's wasn't dumbed down and amazing effects.

The next two were badly flawed. And by this time I expected more from the people behind them. I don't blame Connery for not wanting to do this one.

Crunchy Carpets said...

This is cheesing me.
I was a HUGE fan of Harrison Ford....adored him in the purest fangirl fashion...loved his movies and couldn't get enough of him.

Then as I got older and also started to see beyond the hollywood glitter, I realized that he was human and flawed and was probably only a hero in my mind.

I grew up.

Dh was pointing out to me the other day after all the 30th anniversary stuff for Star Wars..where was H?
Has he ever shown up at anything for Star Wars since the movies?

I can't recall.

I don't recall ever hearing him thanking the fans of the movie for giving him the career that he has had. Not thanked them for their support in making him wealthy and able to shag stick insect younger actresses??

I like to think that once we are no longer teenagers we can get over the glitter and glamor and realize that actors work for a living..they make the movies and say the right words..that there is rarely anything else more than that.

Dh and I love watching the movie channels and figuring out which flick was a 'mortgage' movie for the actors..the one's that you boggle that they said yes to.

When you see the dreck that some do..you gotta realize they are happy for just a paycheck..no matter how rich they already are.

SQT said...

Yes yes, I get it. You're more grown up and smarter than the rest of us.

*shrug*

I don't care. I like Indy anyway. I'm not invested in Harrison Ford's personality. I don't care if he's an ass in real life. It's the character I like and I like HF's performance as that character. All the peripheral stuff doesn't really factor into it. The movies are enjoyable and that's all I care about.

Alex said...

No matter. Harrison Ford is half the actor Bruce Campbell is, but Bruce has never done a movie with a budget over $2, some pocket lint, a couple of jacks, and a half-chewn piece of Bazooka Joe.

Every movie is a mortgage movie for Bruce, and we love him all the more for it!

Crunchy Carpets said...

I didn't say that sqt..I just think sometimes that people aren't picky enough..that 'entertainment' means to forgive and if people are 'movie' fans...I would think they WOULD picky or notice problems...

but that is just me...

Oh well

SQT said...

Crunchy, but compared to what we get with other franchises, like "The Matrix" and "Fantastic Four," not to mention the later "Star Wars" trilogy, Indy looks pretty darn good.

I'm not saying there aren't flaws, but if I was going to view every movie with a critic's eye, then I wouldn't get to enjoy anything.

I remember Alex saying that if you could turn off your brain you could enjoy "Eragon." (though the book is still completely unreadable)

Alex said...

It's true. Eragon was good after sniffing half a bottle of paint thinner.

Speaking of which, people who rag on Episodes 1-3 of Star Wars have been shooting the paint thinner up. Yeah, it's not quite the same as when we were kids, but it's still damned fine entertainment.

You know, it's like expecting to be as excited about the newest candy innovations when you're 40 years old as when you were 8! Shit just doesn't work like that. The original Star Wars films were not high art - they were space adventures for the kiddies, just like the new ones. But guess what? We're all old now.

SQT said...

Yeah I'm old, I admit it.

I think with the "Star Wars" 1-3 episodes I just wanted more of what I loved about the ones I watched as a kid. The newer movies have so much CGI and I like more story. There were elements I liked though. I remember watching the first one and thinking the pod race, despite the implausibility of Anakin driving the thing, was fun to watch.

Crunchy Carpets said...

I ain' saying nothin.

SQT said...

Rofl

Hey, most of us gripe about episodes 1-3. All you need to say is Jar Jar Binks and most people just nod in agreement. I was just saying that there were a couple of elements that were entertaining. But I still haven't seen "Revenge of the Sith" so that just goes to show how much I liked the whole thing.

Alex said...

Wow. Maybe the drool from the scenes with Natalie Portman distracted me, but I really liked the new ones. They were good children's films for the first three, and they're good children's films now.

And Jarjar is nowhere near as @#$%ing annoying as a whole village full of Ewoks. Go watch the old ones again, and groan each time one of them does a Tarzan yell while swinging on a rope. Kee-rist!

SQT said...

Yeah, all that drool was making you delirious.

You have a good point though. I watched the original SW movies as a kid and they have been put into sort of a sacred cow category I put treasured memories. I don't even remember being annoyed by the Ewoks.

Alex said...

I want to go Ewok hunting.

Hell, I'd like to commit Ewok genocide!