I don't see how many people could argue with that. I'm sure they will, however.

IrrationaliTV | May 21, 00:56 CET

I'd rather like to see Mal some more, he and his intrepid crew.

quantumac | May 21, 01:17 CET

You know, they've got a point. I think it'd be pretty awesome to see the Indiana Jones movies carry on in a James Bond style, and I sure can't argue with Nathan taking the lead, he really would be damn good at it.

nicetomeatyou | May 21, 01:41 CET

I'm sorry, TamaraC, but I have to argue with that. NO one else can play Indiana Jones; he's too iconic. Batman & James Bond have been rotationalized, but the movies have been set up for them that way. Plus, Batman & James Bond do decent movies, but aren't great, box office-wise.

You can't re-cast Hans Solo, Wolverine, the *new* Batman (going 2 for 2 so far), or Arnold as the Terminator. Same goes with Harrison Ford. Nathan Fillion is a fine actor (love Firefly & Serenity & Drive), but he's not Indy.

This new movie is the perfect bridge from the old Indy-movies and the prospect for new ones. Shia LeBoeuf is a great actor also, and I think he has the chops to carry on in Indy's shadow, but not his name. Shia could never be Indiana Jones; but he could be his kid.

You just can't mess with the original in this case. IMO.

korkster | May 21, 01:46 CET

I totally agree with korkster. As much as I respect and enjoy Nathan Fillion as an actor, and have no doubt that he could pull off a brilliant Indiana Jones (hell it's pretty clear that Mal is strongly influenced by Indiana and Han Solo), Harrison Ford just owns those two characters and it just wouldn't be the same if someone else was playing them.

And the same goes for Shia LaBoeuf. I can't wait to see Crystal Skulls, and based on LaBoeuf's previous work I think he'll do a great job as a separate character in the Indiana Jones universe, but no way would I ever want him to take over as the character. And even if rumours are to be believed and there is another sequel with Harrison taking a backseat and LaBoeuf's character taking centre stage, I don't think it should be part of the main Indiana Jones franchise but a separate part.

Razor | May 21, 02:15 CET

I think the point is IF the character were to be recast, then Fillion would be a good fit.

Arguing that no one should be cast in the role except Ford is totally different, IMO.

IrrationaliTV | May 21, 02:35 CET

I think anyone else as Indiana Jones would be absurd. Shia can stay on as Mutt, and maybe Nathan can be a nephew of Indiana Jones who can pick up where Uncle Indy left off. We can call it "The Jones Chronicles" or something.

impalergeneral | May 21, 03:36 CET

It's interesting because Nathan's name has come for discussion when talking about a movie version of the PS3 game Uncharted. If you haven't seen this game, it's phenomenal. The main character, Nathan Drake, seems to be modeled after Nathan Fillion/Mal. His talk, humor and overall charm and wit and very close to Nathan/Mals.

It was fun to read the comments om Joystiq, almost everyone agreed that it would be a perfect role for Nathan. It's not Indy but is a fantastic game with a great story. I think it would translate very well to the big screen if handled by the right people. Stay away Uwe Boll!

munn75 | May 21, 05:08 CET

I'm just following suit, TamaraC. My argument is that Indiana Jones should not be thought for a re-cast. No Shia, no Nathan, nothing.

korkster | May 21, 06:03 CET

It'll probably become a legacy character, like many comics staples, the Flash for example. From the movie, it's clear they're grooming Shia to be the next Indy generation, and it's a wise choice.

Perseo | May 21, 07:14 CET

A friend suggested this scenario to me a couple of months ago, and you know what? It's the first time I've ever heard a suggestion for a new Indy that didn't make me groan. Fillion has already proven that he can out Han Solo Harrison Ford. I'm sure he could do at least as good as Indy. In terms of how iconic the character is, that's what makes it a character that could be passed on for me. If only one actor could ever play that character, then it's the actor that's iconic, not the character. I'd like to think that Indy is more iconic than that.

joelseph | May 21, 08:27 CET

korkster:

I'm sorry, TamaraC, but I have to argue with that. NO one else can play Indiana Jones; he's too iconic. Batman & James Bond have been rotationalized, but the movies have been set up for them that way. Plus, Batman & James Bond do decent movies, but aren't great, box office-wise.

I beg to differ on that Batman and James Bond aren't great, box office wise... Batman Begins pulled in $205,343,774 domestic. Casino Royale pulled $167,445,960 domestic, but when you factor in the overwhelming worldwide box office of $426,793,106, you get a James Bond movie that made almost $600,000 worldwide.

I don't think these qualify as flops.

Even if we talk about the oldies, Goldeneye (1995) made $106,429,941 but adjust that for inflation in 2007 numbers, and you get a total domestic gross of $147,107,983.93...even less than Casino Royale. Let's try Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. In 1984, it pulled in $179,870,271. In 2007's inflation numbers, we're talking $369,872,435.21...much better than Batman Begins, but it is now in the rankings of an adventure movie like Pirates of the Caribbean, which at its height (with Dead Man's Chest) made $423,315,812. You have a built-in fan base, like with comic book movies. You have a group of people who have seen the quality that goes into them, and are hungry for more. National Treasure and its sequel both have made well over $150 million on the premise that people like adventure movies.

I'm telling you...it can be done, and it is a potential gold mine. All of the numbers came from Box Office Mojo and the inflation calculations were done on westegg.org/inflation/infl.cgi.

the ninja report | May 21, 09:03 CET

Fillion as Dr. Jones: I'd be there in the front row with popcorn and a big grin. Bring it on (if only).

Hell, Fillion as basically every hero I've ever admired, for that matter. Admittedly, there aren't many, and they've all been a bit rogueish (Fillion as Jim DiGriz? Hell yeah) ... but still :)

Ghalev | May 21, 09:31 CET

OK, I love Nathan... but I'm pretty sure it is blasphemy to recast Indy. You just can't do it. I grew up watching Harrison Ford (my first BIG crush, despite the fact he is like 10 years older than my dad), and although there are many similarities between Nathan and Harrison, it just can't be done.
Plus, I would prefer it if Nathan would find his own iconic niche in the mainstream (I know what you are thinking, he already found it as Mal, but honestly when I say something about Nathan, about 90% of people ask me who that is).
One point going for him, though, is he can take a beating better than anyone I've ever seen.
If they did it, I would see it, but I don't know how enthusiastic I could be.

Linnea1928 | May 21, 12:59 CET

Fuck gold mine. Strip mine is more like it. Indiana Jones is a great, iconic character in an equally great series of films but things end folks. Jeez, can't we just enjoy a story without feeling the need to reboot, recast, re-enfranchise, commoditise and monetise absolutely everything ? [/rant]

That said, if it happened then Nathan would be a fine choice. It just shouldn't ever happen.

(Batman and James Bond were both very well known and more or less fully realised characters before their film incarnations so slotting different actors into the roles is more natural. Indiana Jones is as much Harrison Ford as he is the words on the page though, slot someone else in and the character changes. The National Treasure movies did well ? Cool, make more of those then or, better yet, create another great, iconic character in a similar vein - originality isn't a bad word y'know ? Except maybe where the studio's risk assessors are concerned)

Saje | May 21, 13:40 CET

I'm with you Linnea. We've already had a slight (okay, so a tad more than slight) Ford association, through Mal, for Fillion. I want to see what he's got to offer himself. Look at Caleb in Season 7 of Buffy. I think that he is one of the scariest villians of the series. He's obviously flexible and a great actor.

Smiggins | May 21, 15:40 CET

Sorry, CaffeinatedSquint, but I agree with Saje on this one. You mention National Treasure & Pirates of the Caribbean as examples of good solid action movies. Would you watch National Treasure if it didn't have Nicolas Cage in it? If they left out Johnny Depp & Orlando Bloom, would Piraes of the Caribbean still be woth watching? PotC finished its trilogy (same as Indiana Jones). Those characters belong to those actors. Heck, they redid Disneyland's ride to incorporate the movie more!

As Saje said, Batman & James Bond were well known before the movies opened up (see comics for Batman, not sure about James Bond). They're re-doing(re-did) the Hulk with a new actor and I bet it'll be good (well, better than the last one). People will go because they get the premise: when scrawny guy gets upset, he turns big & green & smashes things. That equals action, people understand what they're getting, and it'll be a hit. Check out Iron Man. Everyone went to go see it because they wanted the action. After watching the movie, when the sequel comes out (2010), they'll come back for the actors and action. I'd have a problem if they recast Iron Man; RDJ did a great job.

Let's just wait to see what happens tomorrow regarding numbers to see if Indiana Jones can be without Harrison Ford.

korkster | May 21, 22:17 CET

I can understand how people who are really invested in Indy might feel this is a sacrilege, but as a casual observer, who sorta remembers seeing and liking Harrison Ford in this part sometime long ago, but isn't all worked up about it, I think Nathan would be fantastic in that space. I remember thinking it when I saw my first episode of Firefly, but wasn't yet a fan... Huh. That guy looks familiar. Plus, he kinda reminds me of a better-acted Indiana Jones. Maybe this show's gonna be good and maybe this guy will start get some cool movie parts. Just sayin'.

barest_smidgen | May 21, 22:56 CET

Hard for me to imagine a mvoie character which is so iconic down to the actor,e xcept Indy. Rick Blaine maybe but Bogie only played him once.

But there'll probably never be another successful Perry MAson on TV until the end of time.

DaddyCatALSO | May 22, 16:24 CET