Twilight Star Robert Pattinson Confirms He Won't be Indy in Indiana Jones Reboot

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Twilight Star Robert Pattinson Confirms He Won't be Indy in Indiana Jones Reboot

Pattinson Indy

Contrary to rumors circulating, Robert Pattinson has confirmed he won't be the protagonist in the new Indiana Jones reboot.

Earlier this year, rumors were circulating that Harrison Ford's time as Dr. Henry Walton "Indy" Jones might be up, and that studios were looking to reboot the Indiana Jones film franchise with a younger protagonist. Well, you can cross Twilight star Robert Pattinson off that list -- at least for the time being. Contrary to rumors that spread this month that Pattinson was tapped to be the next Indiana Jones, the British actor debunked the murmurs in a recent interview with MTV.

When asked about the rumor, Pattinson answered with an emphatic "No," and added, "I didn't even know they were rebooting it." This isn't the first time Pattinson's name has been attached to a big-name film. Back when Daredevil film license was still at Fox, Pattinson was one of the rumored forerunners to play the blind vigilante.

"People just [make rumors up] so I get bad press afterwards," Pattinson adds. "'Hey, how about you play Jesus!' 'No, he should just die!' Great, thanks man," he finishes.

While you might not see Pattinson swing the whip soon, you can catch him in the Australian crime drama, The Rover, which will see an expanded film release in the US this June.

Are you glad that Pattinson won't be Indy? If so, whom would you rather replace Ford as the infamous doctor if and when a reboot happens?

Source: MTV

Permalink

You know what? I'd actually like to see him take the role. I mean, yeah, Twilight sucked, of course it did, but that doesn't mean the actors from it can't do any good given the right material and direction. And the guy needs to catch a break.

In other news, INDIANA JONES REBOOT.

RealRT:
You know what? I'd actually like to see him take the role. I mean, yeah, Twilight sucked, of course it did, but that doesn't mean the actors from it can't do any good given the right material and direction. And the guy needs to catch a break.

He was definitely alright in The Goblet of Fire.

RealRT:
You know what? I'd actually like to see him take the role. I mean, yeah, Twilight sucked, of course it did, but that doesn't mean the actors from it can't do any good given the right material and direction. And the guy needs to catch a break.

Isn't he outspoken about his own hatred for the role? Seems to me like it was just a paycheck to him, which I can fully understand.

But to be honest, there are a lot of actors out there who could pull it off, and if Star Trek (2009) and Into Darkness showed us anything, it's that even great casting can still lead to the movies failing critically, so I'd personally rather see a well written, well directed but mediocre acted movie then a well acted but poorly written and directed one.

He's very conscious about the geek community hatred of him. He's going to need to play a few key roles to shake off the reputation.

Although, the elephant in the room that I've never seen until lately was that there's an Indiana Jones reboot with all kinds of "Why?" and "Wait WHAT?!".

Alex Co:
If so, whom would you rather replace Ford as the infamous doctor if and when a reboot happens?

How about they let the series end, and start trying to come up with new concepts, ideas and characters?

...oh, right, I'm talking about Hollywood. They don't do that anymore.

crispskittlez:

RealRT:
You know what? I'd actually like to see him take the role. I mean, yeah, Twilight sucked, of course it did, but that doesn't mean the actors from it can't do any good given the right material and direction. And the guy needs to catch a break.

He was definitely alright in The Goblet of Fire.

I liked him in the Goblet of Fire <_<.

Zontar:

RealRT:
You know what? I'd actually like to see him take the role. I mean, yeah, Twilight sucked, of course it did, but that doesn't mean the actors from it can't do any good given the right material and direction. And the guy needs to catch a break.

Isn't he outspoken about his own hatred for the role? Seems to me like it was just a paycheck to him, which I can fully understand.

But to be honest, there are a lot of actors out there who could pull it off, and if Star Trek (2009) and Into Darkness showed us anything, it's that even great casting can still lead to the movies failing critically, so I'd personally rather see a well written, well directed but mediocre acted movie then a well acted but poorly written and directed one.

That he is, but a lot of people still hate him for no good reason.
Can you really do Indiana Jones without Indy's charisma?

I really dont mind him, he does seem to be aware that Twilight was indeed shit and is up for better roles.

With that said I dont think he would be a good Indy, in a matter of fact I dont see anyone out there being a good Indy. Indiana Jones was basicly Han Solo, the archaeologist, and I dont see anyone else being Han Solo either.

Wait, Indiana Jones is getting a reboot?

That's it Hollywood, you've gone too far into the abyss, I'm digging out my torch and pitchfork.

This has converted me to Christianity. There must be a god.

RealRT:

Can you really do Indiana Jones without Indy's charisma?

Well, they did that in Crystal Skull, so it can be done. Probably not very well, but it can be done.

He's not bad but I thi-

0_0

WAIT! Indiana Jones reboot!?!

It wish people were more able to separate an actor from his/her character, especially when they hate the character.

It's not Pattinsons fault Twilight required him to act like a block of stone, literally.
Well okay he signed on for the role. But he shouldn't be hated for it, the film would have happened anyway.

So Robert Pattison and approximately 7 billion other people aren't going to be the next Indiana Jones. Can we limit casting rumor news to things that are supposedly happening?

I think he's a good actor, but i can't see him in a role as an Indiana Jones type character. He seems more suited for stuff like Cosmopolis.

It's really too bad he had to get all the negativity of Twilight. In every interview I've seen he's been a really nice guy who gets the nonsensical popularity of the series.
He's also not a terrible actor, it's just that no actor on the planet could make those lines work OR have chemistry with Christin Stewart.

As for this, I suppose I'm glad, though I could actually see it. He reminds me of River Phoenix in a weird way.

The more important of this is that HOLY FUCK THERE'S GOING TO BE AN INDIANA JONES REBOOT. why. why is this happening. for the love of god why.

On an unrelated note I now know that Indy's middle name is Walton. I don't know how to feel about this.

If they just have to make an Indy reboot, I'd prefer they went with someone a little more seasoned. Nothing against Pattinson. I don't really know much about him other than a bunch of people I don't know seem to hate a film series I've never been inclined to watch. But everyone starts somewhere.

Just not sure why they want to reboot Indiana Jones at all. It's kinda like the Nightmare On Elm Street reboot from a few years back. The actor was great, but no one else can really BE Freddy Krueger. It's got too much of Robert Englund attached to the very core of the character. Anyone other than Englund was going to feel like expensive cosplay and that's exactly what happened through no fault of his. I kinda feel like Indiana Jones could suffer from the same issues. Harrison Ford and Indiana Jones are synonyms at this point.

Random Argument Man:
He's very conscious about the geek community hatred of him. He's going to need to play a few key roles to shake off the reputation.

It's been done before. I remember back in high school, there were few things that would have brought me more joy than to punch Leonardo DiCaprio right in his pretty boy face. I was so sick of hearing about him, and any movie that had him in it was basically an instant "No" because it was all-but guaranteed to be some crappy romance movie for the women to swoon over. I guess you could say that he was my generation's Bieber, but that would be a blatant insult since I'm sure that at no point in his personal life was Leo even half the dickhead that Bieber has been.

*Ahem* But anyway, fast forward to today, and now it's just the opposite. I freaking love Leo, and will consider seeing a movie simply by him being on the cast list. They aren't all great, but he's just such an awesome actor that it's worth seeing the movie anyway. I think Robert could easily have that kind of track record. He seems like an okay guy, just needs to be in a few movies that aren't horrible swoonbait rubbish.

Edit: Hm... "swoonbait". I like it. I'm gonna have to start using that term more often as way of describing cheesy romance flicks with the heartthrob du jour in the lead role.

WhiteTigerShiro:

Random Argument Man:
He's very conscious about the geek community hatred of him. He's going to need to play a few key roles to shake off the reputation.

It's been done before. I remember back in high school, there were few things that would have brought me more joy than to punch Leonardo DiCaprio right in his pretty boy face. I was so sick of hearing about him, and any movie that had him in it was basically an instant "No" because it was all-but guaranteed to be some crappy romance movie for the women to swoon over. I guess you could say that he was my generation's Bieber, but that would be a blatant insult since I'm sure that at no point in his personal life was Leo even half the dickhead that Bieber has been.

*Ahem* But anyway, fast forward to today, and now it's just the opposite. I freaking love Leo, and will consider seeing a movie simply by him being on the cast list. They aren't all great, but he's just such an awesome actor that it's worth seeing the movie anyway. I think Robert could easily have that kind of track record. He seems like an okay guy, just needs to be in a few movies that aren't horrible swoonbait rubbish.

Edit: Hm... "swoonbait". I like it. I'm gonna have to start using that term more often as way of describing cheesy romance flicks with the heartthrob du jour in the lead role.

Oh man.....I remember that Leo craze even if I was just a kid. I'm cheering for Leo to finally get that damn Oscar.

I didn't even know they were planning on rebooting it. So to summarize this article, the good news: Robert Pattinson won't be playing Indiana Jones. The bad news: they're rebooting Indiana Jones.

Thank God for that, but ..... what do you mean with Indy reboot .... this is new for me

I'm just going to pretend this Indy Reboot thing isn't going to actually happen. Just like with Crystal Skull and the Star Wars prequels.

RealRT:
You know what? I'd actually like to see him take the role. I mean, yeah, Twilight sucked, of course it did, but that doesn't mean the actors from it can't do any good given the right material and direction. And the guy needs to catch a break.

Have you seen The Rover? Australian film with Pattinson in it. The guy can act like a mother fucker. So can most who were in the Twilight series.

Ad to be honest, the Twilight series didn't have bad acting in it. It's just really, really hard to act well when the script, and the source the script is based off of, is written like a fuckin' mongoloid.

What I [already] knew: Indiana Jones reboot...
What I didn't know [already]: Robert Pattinson "rumored" to be the next "Indy"...

Now that I'm "caught" up to speed... uh... "Eh..."
I mean, I not hung up that Robert's not the new "Indy" or not, to be honest... Although, now I must watch The Rover, which seems to be the main thing I got out of this thread...

Other than that... uh... I can't think of a person who should play new "Indy" that's not over the age of 50, let alone 40 right now...

SanguiniusMagnificum:
Wait, Indiana Jones is getting a reboot?

That's it Hollywood, you've gone too far into the abyss, I'm digging out my torch and pitchfork.

Hold on a second there. Normally I'd agree...but Indiana Jones is now owned by Disney. And they've done pretty well by Marvel so far...

Makes sense to not have an ugly, uncharismatic actor with hygiene problems as the actor for a new Indy.

That's a shame. I kinda like him. He's arguably one of the best choices for a young Dr. Jones.

Otherwise, I would still nominate the hell out of Shia LeBeouf. I think he deserves a chance at a good role.

ZZoMBiE13:

Just not sure why they want to reboot Indiana Jones at all. It's kinda like the Nightmare On Elm Street reboot from a few years back. The actor was great, but no one else can really BE Freddy Krueger. It's got too much of Robert Englund attached to the very core of the character. Anyone other than Englund was going to feel like expensive cosplay and that's exactly what happened through no fault of his. I kinda feel like Indiana Jones could suffer from the same issues. Harrison Ford and Indiana Jones are synonyms at this point.

Ford only played Indy in fo--- *ducks gunfire* three movies.

They managed to succesfully recast James Bond from Sean Connery playing him in six movies (with another guy in the middle), Roger Moore playing him in seven, and Brosnan in four. (And Dalton in two).

Although Bond has always been in the present/near future, which has let him move gracefully over the years. The mileage you get out of Indy's "period piece" stigma is debatedly less (and the attempt to shift periods didn't go over well). The actor being recast probably isn't its major problem though.

They're going to WHAT?

No. No, no, nononononononononononononono, sweet merciful GOD NO. The Indiana Jones movies are classics, DO NOT REBOOT THEM. DO NOT defile the legacy of Harrison Ford and Steven Speilburg with a poor-quality, modernized rehash of the iconic character and stories. I can't think of a single current-generation actor that has Ford's charisma and presence on screen. Nobody can own the role of Indiana Jones like he can; any current-generation actor trying to will just come across as someone dressing up as Indiana Jones and trying to do an impersonation.

And who are they going to get to direct a reboot? Michael Bay? Oh God Almighty, I'd be tempted to pull a South Park and threaten to shoot the premire copy of the film with a rocket before letting that shakey-cam-addicted hack put his version of Indy on the screens. M. Night Shamalayan? Please, that'll have people's faces melting like they just opened The Ark of The Covenant. Simon West? Pfff. John Turteltaub? Meh, only if you wanted a toothless reboot with no guns in it no matter how unfeasable that would be. The only one I can think of that would come close would be Stephen Sommers, but even his style doesn't quite match up with Speilburg's. As for Speilburg himself, I really hope the man has the strength of conviction to refuse to take part in something like this. If the majority of the reboots we've seen are much to go by, odds are this is going to be lackluster at BEST.

Bottom line, today's Hollywood just seems like the wrong place to try and do a series like Indiana Jones properly. It's all liberal politics, lowest common denominator mass marketing, over-reliance on special effects and focus group made films designed by committee. At least that's how it seems to me. Many current generation directors don't have appealing styles of filmmaking, not like Spielburg, Carpenter, Kubrick or Scorsese. Most current-generation actors and actresses also lack much distinct personalities, unlike Ford, Eastwood, Freeman, Nickelson, Stewart, Dench, Fisher and Weaver. A reboot is inevitably going to be compared to the previous films, and when this oen is, I'm betting dollars to doughnuts it comes across as bland and by-the-numbers, if we're lucky.

The reboot should not happen. Stop it. Stop. Just stop it. Hollywood? Stop. Sit, boy. Sit. I'm at the point where I swear, remakes and reboots should be punishable by death. Someone wants to make some gravy off a thirty year old series that ran it's course? Just kill the bastard. Kill him with fire.

Seth Carter:

ZZoMBiE13:

Just not sure why they want to reboot Indiana Jones at all. It's kinda like the Nightmare On Elm Street reboot from a few years back. The actor was great, but no one else can really BE Freddy Krueger. It's got too much of Robert Englund attached to the very core of the character. Anyone other than Englund was going to feel like expensive cosplay and that's exactly what happened through no fault of his. I kinda feel like Indiana Jones could suffer from the same issues. Harrison Ford and Indiana Jones are synonyms at this point.

Ford only played Indy in fo--- *ducks gunfire* three movies.

They managed to succesfully recast James Bond from Sean Connery playing him in six movies (with another guy in the middle), Roger Moore playing him in seven, and Brosnan in four. (And Dalton in two).

Although Bond has always been in the present/near future, which has let him move gracefully over the years. The mileage you get out of Indy's "period piece" stigma is debatedly less (and the attempt to shift periods didn't go over well). The actor being recast probably isn't its major problem though.

An interesting point. But I've been watching Bond films since For Your Eyes Only and I still hear people tell me "THAT'S NOT REALLY BOND" when I say that it's my favorite since it was my first. Even 30 years later, people still cling to the "original". Heck Connery didn't even play the character for more than a decade. Moore did. But people still cling to the original.

Bond is also an adaptation. Drawn from a book series and if memory serves adapted over other media prior to film. Indy has no such luxury. Harrison Ford build the character from the ground up with his own charm and demeanor. Sure, it's just Han Solo in the 1940s, but still it's always been Ford. For over 30 years. So I stand by the Freddy example. Sure, you CAN recast. But the question is should they?

If they do move forward with it, I just hope they can find the right guy to cast. Either way, thanks for the discussion. :)

Not a God damn mother fucking reboot! I don't care if they continue the series but trying to compete with the classics means you're doing just that. Hollywood now is uninspired and pathetic. They're not going to do anywhere near the quality of the originals, so what the hell is the point!? You know, other than trying to rake in money by milking till blood comes out.

and if Star Trek (2009) and if Into Darkness showed us anything, it's that even great casting can still lead to the movies failing critically, so I'd personally rather see a well written, well directed but mediocre acted movie then a well acted but poorly written and directed one.

Failing Critically... Ya... A 95% (Star Trek) and an 87% (Into Darkness) on Rotten Tomatoes is failing critically...

OT - I know the internet constantly says Karl Urban for everything, but seriously. He has traces of Harrison's charisma. Plus he can pull off the edge of camp you need for a Jones film.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here