6 Reasons Why Indiana Jones 5 Should Not Happen

He’s outrun boulders; he’s ingeniously escaped danger a multitude of times from practically anything that moves; he’s drank from the Holy Grail; he’s defeated the Nazi’s, twice; he hates snakes and he always gets the girl. His name is Indiana Jones, and he’s everyone’s favorite audacious archeologist. After three marvelous and valiant international adventures – Raiders of the Lost Ark, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, and Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (and another one with a nuclear-proof refrigerator for some reason) – Disney announced early last year that there will be a fifth installment to the Indy franchise, set to be released in July 2019. The plot is unknown at this time, but rumors of a younger actor like Chris Pratt or Bradley Cooper taking up the whip and fedora were laid to rest when Harrison Ford announced that Indiana Jones veteran, Steven Spielberg, will direct him in the new film. Longtime-Indy fans are met with mixed feelings about the up and coming project: some are thrilled about the potential it has, and others, with The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull still scarred in their minds, are terrified of seeing their beloved hero embarrassed and ridiculed again. As one of those fans, I wish the best for the nameless film and hope that I'm completely astounded by the final product, but there are certain obstacles that cannot be overlooked when it comes to producing a new Indy movie, and the following is a list of 6 reasons why the untitled Indiana Jones 5 should probably not be made. 1) Shia LaBeouf The contentious Transformers actor became a part of the franchise in Crystal Skull as Mutt Williams, the son of Indy and Raiders of the Lost Ark heroine, Marion Ravenwood (Karen Allen). Though the reunion with Marion, whom has been absent since the original 1981 movie, was refreshing and exciting (even if it did feel a little bit forced), we know that she and Mutt are the only family Indy has now. That means that, unless the writers can find some convoluted, yet convincing way to get rid of them, we're going to see a lot more of LaBeouf and Allen. Marion is well-liked, so her involvement probably won’t be too much of an issue, but LaBeouf has been wrapped up in a good amount of controversy since the Crystal Skull. When his name is in the news, which it frequently has been, it's almost a sure bet that it’s not for respectable reasons. With multiple assault and drug offenses, the actor is difficult to like in any situation; just look at his recent credits. In our opinion, having him by Indy’s side can only be detrimental to what the filmmakers are going to be aiming for. 2) The TERROR Of The FEROCIOUS…Ants? The painfully memorable jungle chase from the Crystal Skull was one of the main complaints against the 4th adventure; it was the equivalent of Jar Jar Binks, so to speak. There were monkeys, rocket launchers, cacti and sword fighting, but perhaps the most absurd part of the dash were the ginormous, man-eating red ants. If you actually managed to relinquish this scene from your mind, here’s a recap: Indy, Marion and Mutt are trying to flee from Irina Spalko (Cate Blanchett) and the Soviets through a dense and dangerous jungle (this is where Mutt meets his monkey friends, gets nailed in the crotch by spiky plants, etc.). Spalko’s car then crashes into an anthill, where these humungous “Siafu” (“big damn ants”) devour the driver and anything else that stands in their way as they begin to swarm the forest floor. Unfortunately, the drivel doesn’t stop there: the ants apparently are not only repelled by the crystal skull (which allows Indy to have an arena for his fistfight with a Russian colonel), but they're also able to climb on top of each other, which we see as they try to attack Spalko, who has taken refuge up on a tree branch. This sequence is entirely ridiculous and infantile. It seems that the ants pose a bigger threat to Indy and his crusade than the Soviets do. Where George Lucas and his writing team came up with this idea may never be comprehended, but what we do know is that we never want to see this sort of insulting nonsense ever again. 3) Aliens(?) Let’s be serious for a second: where on God’s green Earth did the idea of incorporating aliens into an Indiana Jones movie sound like a good idea? Indy discovers ancient relics that have at least some level of plausibility to them. And though I'm not one to say that aliens don't exist, their presence in a movie turns it automatically into a sci-fi picture; and Indiana Jones is not sci-fi. Are we supposed to believe that the famed archeologist goes from obtaining the Holy Grail to picking up extraterrestrial crania? The point to be made here is that previous writers have already dropped the ball while attempting to revive the Indy franchise. And if aliens were the best they could come up with, that is tremendously alarming. Fortunately, it’s already been announced that space-guru George Lucas will have no involvement whatsoever in Indiana Jones 5. It looks like we'll have to wait and see what Disney has up their sleeve then; which leads to the next argument… 4) The Christening Of Micky Mouse When Disney bought out Lucasfilm in 2012, there was a lot of concern about what the future of the Star Wars franchise would look like. Many were afraid that the seriousness and the badassery of the original series would be lost in Disney’s attempt to attract an even younger audience. Fortunately, all of that speculation was put to rest when The Force Awakens was released in 2015 and Rouge One in 2016. But this is Disney’s first attempt at Indiana Jones. While the company may have proven themselves capable of handling Star Wars, Indy’s fate is still very much up in the air. Though both were made by George Lucas, there's no question that they are two very different types of movies that need to be handled very differently. Jones has grit: he mercilessly shoots down showboat swordsmen and he smiles as one of his challengers encounters an airplane blade. And audiences watched in awe as three men met their gruesome deaths from the Ark of the Covenant: we saw one face melt, and another one shrink, and the last one explode in a burst of brain matter and assorted plasma. Will Disney be ok showing this level of viciousness? The closest they’ve come to that point was in Pirates of the Caribbean, but few would suggest that the ferocity in The Curse of the Black Pearl came anywhere near Raiders. The same can be said about the other Indiana Jones movies, and it’s simple to deduct that this kind of wacky, cartoony violence is what we expect from them. Though I like to think they’ll do a great job with Spielberg at the helm, I cannot be certain. Disney definitely has the right pieces to make this happen, but as terrible as it may sound, they will make a mistake sooner or later, and the only thing we can hope for is that it won’t be on an Indiana Jones movie. 5) A Decade Later… Pretty much the only thing that has been revealed about the new movie’s plot is that it will be taking place a decade after Crystal Skull. That throws us into the late ‘60s, so there could be Soviets again. But after Blanchett, let’s hope not. A large part of what made the three original Indiana Jones films so great were the bad guys. As they say, a hero is only as good as their villain, and Indy has certainly had his fair share of vigorous adversaries – no one can forget that buff German mechanic and the airplane that took him down. But there obviously won’t be any Nazi’s in this one. Of course, the success of these movies do not rely entirely on the involvement of them. There were no Nazi’s in Temple of Doom, and that was well received (sort of). The filmmakers must find a way to create another story in the same time period as the last one, without copying Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, for if connections can be made between the two, backlash is inevitable. That means that Soviets are obviously not the way to go. They must also be sure to avoid mimicking any of the other adventures (think back to Temple of Doom). There are certainly substantially fewer roads the new writers can take in Indy 5, and it'll be interesting to see which ones they choose. Please, just no more ants, refrigerators, monkeys or aliens. I don’t know if my heart can take it again. 6) July 13th, 1942 This is obviously not when the story is going to be set. This, believe it or not, is Harrison Ford’s birthday. The living legend who has personified adventure and excitement as Indiana Jones, Han Solo, and Rick Deckard is at an astonishing 74 years of age. That's not to say that Ford cannot continue throwing people off his plane or whatnot, but he’ll be 77 years old when Indiana Jones 5 is released. All hail the king, but come on, even though he pulled off a very energetic Han Solo in The Force Awakens, he’s not exactly chasing down Stormtroopers anymore. But needless to say, where Han Solo’s vitality can afford to be taken down a notch or two, you can’t have Indiana Jones without action. The boulders and the daring escapes are all a part of what makes Jonesy, well, Jonesy. It was obvious that Harrison Ford was slowing down a bit in the Crystal Skull, and that was 10 years ago. Although everyone wants to see the death-defying archeologist whipping and punching his way out of a multitude of circumstances, we don’t want to see our favorite hero, as Roger Ebert said about why The Last Crusade should be the last Indy film, “grow old and thin.”