Another thing I'm disliking is the use of cgi to bring old characters back who are dead in realtime. It's as if the entire goddamn industry is a candy factory for nostalgia. (Oh you don't like the taste of the black or white jelly beans? Ah well the colored ones are coming down the chain next. Yippie!) Harold Ramis is dead and they've brought him back because apparently they can't just make a new Ghostbusters movie without referencing the old.
Wouldn't it be awesome if they took out the callbacks and easter eggs and nostalgia crap and just made a serial on its own merits? No that wouldn't sell. I don't even understand how you can do it behindthescenes. You just make your money and use it to do something your passionate about. It's a job now.
It's called an influx of new people keeping the thing going.
There's definitely some strategic going on between young Indy fans and older contenters. I'm sure it's about getting Kennedy pushed out of Disney. I can't really say where I stand exactly. There's some of it, like her "The future is female" shirt. That part of it will definitely blow up because it's a male-led industry. It's a bit more nefarious though when you look at Indy exclusively. Mangold is up a creek on this one. Indy is 80, and you can't get around that. There's the vague he's white, or he lacks optimism and hope for a young audience. But if you do that then I'd be interested in knowing what the character arch is? There's the mention they don't want Indy to be like his father in part 3. So it feels like they just don't ever want him to age. It's such a bonkers clusterf--k.
Nobody is probably listening by now LOL. Probably a lot of it is earned on KK after SW. I thought Ghostbusters 2016 was accidentally a novel marketing idea. Instead of bringing back the old geezers or new male models, you bring in an all-female cast. Granted the director had to be asked multiple times to join, and it probably was crapily put together with a bunch of whiney, unfunny women. But at the time it was a rather fresh piece of marketing nobody wanted. Afterlife has been deemed a success, but I can't get outta my head a bunch of old geezers with lasers and the ghost of Harold Ramis.
A good question for fans is when does IJ (or Han if he's brought back) end for fans???
In retrospect, Indy ended for this particular fan when he rode into the sunset at the end of Last Crusade. The character in Crystal Skullfuck was just an imitation, who looked like Indy but didn’t behave like him at all.
Han ended for me when he got frozen in Carbonite. When he thawed out he was a bumbling buffoon.
Subsequent portrayals of each character have led me to seriously question the professional integrity of Harrison Ford. He’s in in for the bucks and all the PR spin about wanting to have a “conclusion” is just horseshit.
In retrospect, Indy ended for this particular fan when he rode into the sunset at the end of Last Crusade. The character in Crystal Skullfuck was just an imitation, who looked like Indy but didn’t behave like him at all.
Han ended for me when he got frozen in Carbonite. When he thawed out he was a bumbling buffoon.
Subsequent portrayals of each character have led me to seriously question the professional integrity of Harrison Ford. He’s in in for the bucks and all the PR spin about wanting to have a “conclusion” is just horseshit.
We share this same perspective. The Last Crusade ends with a ride into the sunset. This is dramatic shorthand for the conclusion of a saga. Not that Indiana Jones is much of a saga. There is no grand story they are telling. It is just a franchise so I guess we should've expected Spielberg and Lucas to go back to the well because the fanbase demands a product. Rinse and repeat for today. And Return of the Jedi is quite a bad movie. Many Star Wars fans still struggle recognizing it as one.
With your final paragraph, I should always ask you to constantly question the professional integrity of every actor. It is a job. There is nothing special about it other than bringing entertainment or emotion to an audience who wants to witness your job being performed. The sooner we stop treating movies stars and franchise movies as some precious commodity the sooner we can come to realize that they are trying to make ends meet, just like us*.
(* Mr. Ford just lives an expensive lifestyle, relatively speaking; I'm sure his property taxes are high owning 800 acres of land as his primary residence.)
I don't go to work because I love employment. But I do enjoy not being homeless.
I'm sure Harrison Ford wanted to be a full time carpenter again less than he likes Star Wars. He's paid to act in films and since very few of the films he's in tax his ability (he does have ability), he takes the big payday roles. He's not Dustin Hoffman, he's Harrison Ford. His persona is what resonates with audiences. Actors who fall into that tend to not be successful in breakout roles. And how many "Regarding Henry" type scripts cross his desk?
I don't think anyone did "Return of the Jedi" for artistic reasons. Ford could have walked, he wasn't contractually bound and he had Raiders adding to his value. But as a kid, I would have been depressed for a year if Leia unthawed a corpse in Jabba's palace.
Film actors who only do roles with "artistic integrity" had better be Daniel Day Lewis. Otherwise they'll have very short careers.
I agree with nuts_score, actors are employed people. That's it. they do a job like you or me. And it's no easier to change professions for Harrison Ford than it is for anyone else. It's not his hobby, it's his living. And like me, he goes where the money is.
I don't go to work because I love employment. But I do enjoy not being homeless.
I'm sure Harrison Ford wanted to be a full time carpenter again less than he likes Star Wars. He's paid to act in films and since very few of the films he's in tax his ability (he does have ability), he takes the big payday roles. He's not Dustin Hoffman, he's Harrison Ford. His persona is what resonates with audiences. Actors who fall into that tend to not be successful in breakout roles. And how many "Regarding Henry" type scripts cross his desk?
I don't think anyone did "Return of the Jedi" for artistic reasons. Ford could have walked, he wasn't contractually bound and he had Raiders adding to his value. But as a kid, I would have been depressed for a year if Leia unthawed a corpse in Jabba's palace.
Film actors who only do roles with "artistic integrity" had better be Daniel Day Lewis. Otherwise they'll have very short careers.
I agree with nuts_score, actors are employed people. That's it. they do a job like you or me. And it's no easier to change professions for Harrison Ford than it is for anyone else. It's not his hobby, it's his living. And like me, he goes where the money is.
But when do you say fandom is the problem with an 80 year-old playing a younger persons role? Even if it's only a movie. After a while I'd think ya say man this is getting goofy.
It's not that black or white. He acts because he likes to act, its a creative outlet far better than working at an Amazon warehouse. So while its work, its also "fun". Sometimes you take the job for the money, which is fine too. Nothing wrong with making an honest buck.
But as far as working to pay his enormous bills or whatever, the guy is filthy rich and could live very comfortably and modestly without taking projects just to support a certain lifestyle. There's no law saying a millionaire has to live like a millionaire, that's a choice.
Although I guess it could be stated that you live like a millionaire because you are a millionaire. I don't know about you, but when my career elevates and I earn more I also take on new hobbies or interests or activities that I can now finance and still live comfortably doing. Now imagine that ten-fold. I can't live like a millionaire because I'm not. I have a lot of passion for cars and boats and cool stuff like that but I can't pursue it like Harrison Ford or Tom Cruise can. But if I could, I absolutely would.
Although I guess it could be stated that you live like a millionaire because you are a millionaire. I don't know about you, but when my career elevates and I earn more I also take on new hobbies or interests or activities that I can now finance and still live comfortably doing. Now imagine that ten-fold. I can't live like a millionaire because I'm not. I have a lot of passion for cars and boats and cool stuff like that but I can't pursue it like Harrison Ford or Tom Cruise can. But if I could, I absolutely would.
Sure, if I had extra income I would have a nicer car, home, and indulge in some things. But I question anyone one who owns a 20 room mansion with 10 bathrooms. Considering their lifestyles, they're probably not living in any one residence for more than a few months out of the year and they probably got three or so homes. I look at these composers mansions and just ask myself, why?
Although I guess it could be stated that you live like a millionaire because you are a millionaire. I don't know about you, but when my career elevates and I earn more I also take on new hobbies or interests or activities that I can now finance and still live comfortably doing. Now imagine that ten-fold. I can't live like a millionaire because I'm not. I have a lot of passion for cars and boats and cool stuff like that but I can't pursue it like Harrison Ford or Tom Cruise can. But if I could, I absolutely would.
Sure, if I had extra income I would have a nicer car, home, and indulge in some things. But I question anyone one who owns a 20 room mansion with 10 bathrooms. Considering their lifestyles, they're probably not living in any one residence for more than a few months out of the year and they probably got three or so homes. I look at these composers mansions and just ask myself, why?
Think in the end they just end up donating their wealth. Had it. Done it. Give it to someone who really needs it. The parts that don't is often business infrastructure and not wanting to unemploy staff. Warren Buffet lives in like a moderately size house I've heard. He's more interested in generating wealth than living it on an equal plane.
