Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Movies Media

Lucas, Ford to Start Filming New Indiana Jones Film 477

Posted by Zonk
from the junior? dept.
Alchemist253 writes "George Lucas has announced that the script for the long-rumored fourth Indiana Jones film has been finalized and is to begin filming this year, with Harrison Ford once again in front of the camera. From the article: 'In a statement, the 64-year-old Ford said he was ready for another turn as the globe-trotting archaeologist. "I'm delighted to be back in business with my old friends," he said. "I don't know if the pants still fit, but I know the hat will."' All three of the earlier movies were shot in the 80s. How well do you think this character is going to translate into a movie made today?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Lucas, Ford to Start Filming New Indiana Jones Film

Comments Filter:
  • by Chas (5144) on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @12:39PM (#17432374) Homepage Journal
    *Decks a Nazi out*

    *CRACK*

    "Shit! My back went again!"
  • Just yesterday I spoke with someone from ILM, and they were saying how the film wasn't going to happen because Lucas kept rejecting scripts. Good to hear he found one he liked...
    • by pizza_milkshake (580452) on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @12:43PM (#17432420)
      not enough CG characters.
    • by morgan_greywolf (835522) on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @12:48PM (#17432518) Homepage Journal
      The one that was adopted:

      Indiana Jones and the Annoying Alien from Naboo

      JJ: "Meesa no liiiike Nazzzzziiis!!"
      IJ: *crack* "Oh, my back!" *crack*
      JJ: "Aaaaaggghh!!! Meesa no like bull whip!!!!"
    • by Dystopian Rebel (714995) * on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @12:52PM (#17432584) Journal
      Lucas kept rejecting scripts


      Anything that keeps Lucas from writing scripts deserves our support.
      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by camperdave (969942)
        Yeah, that could have been bad:
        *glucas has rejected script1
        *glucas has rejected script2
        *glucas has rejected script3
        ...
        *glucas has rejected script4
        *glucas has rejected script5
        glucas: Bantha pudu, all of it. I'll write the script.
        *glucas pounds on keyboard for 37 minutes
        glucas: There! A rollicking adventure about Indie finding a lost island and a chest full of cursed Aztec gold.
        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by macshit (157376)
          glucas: There! A rollicking adventure about Indie finding a lost island and a chest full of cursed Aztec gold.

          "... and a CGI humanoid chicken. Love that chicken!"
    • Just yesterday I spoke with someone from ILM, and they were saying how the film wasn't going to happen because Lucas kept rejecting scripts. Good to hear he found one he liked...

      With how well the Star Wars prequels were written, maybe it would be better if he was forced to use a script that he didn't like. Honestly, there are several directors that I really wish would find another director (who would treat the material better) to handle sequels/prequels of movies that were made 10-20+ years ago.
    • by eno2001 (527078)
      Oh it'll be made alright. They'll use CGI to augment Ford's looks. He'll wind up looking better than he did in the 80s. Probably like a cross between that Russell Crow guy and the Terminator. And he'll probably wind up having a big fight with several thousand "natives" while jumping all over the place in superhuman fashion. AND... he'll DEFINITELY shoot first.
    • by WarlockD (623872)
      Just yesterday I spoke with someone from ILM, and they were saying how the film wasn't going to happen because Lucas kept rejecting scripts. Good to hear he found one he liked...

      I dunno. He also was the one that approved Jar-Jar in Episode 1....
  • shot in versus (Score:5, Interesting)

    by sammy baby (14909) on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @12:41PM (#17432400) Journal
    All three of the earlier movies were shot in the 80s. How well do you think this character is going to translate into a movie made today?


    The originals were all done in the pulp-action adventure style that was popularized fifty and sixty years ago - I doubt that it'll somehow be less attractive now than it was when the genre was only thirty years old.

    Also, all three may have been shot in the eighties, but they took place in the forties, so it's not like we're going to see an Indiana Jones trying to come to terms with teh Intarwebs.

    On the other hand, twenty-some odd years later... hey, an Indiana Jones that took place in the sixties might have real potential.
    • Re:shot in versus (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Thansal (999464) on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @12:52PM (#17432574)
      I honestly hope they DON'T ditch the pulp fiction feel of it.

      What the entertainment industry lacks currently is light stuff like pulp fiction, be it books, movies, or tv shows (I will admit that the day and age of the radio drama are probably gone, though they could be revived via the use of netcasts).

      I have honestly been goign back and reading some of the old stuff (before my time) jsut because it is hard to find anytihng like it that is current. After all, I can only take so many pieces that are trying to be high-brow/intelectual/witty/etc. Every so often I need something that is just pure release and nothing else.
      • by skam240 (789197)
        my hope is that they produce something more like lost ark and less like temple of doom. temple's not a bad movie but it just doesnt have the same feel as the first one. the difference between the two kind of reminds me of the difference between empire strikes back and return of the jedi. empire just had a better dramatic quality to it just like the lost ark did in the indiana jones series.
      • by SirWinston (54399) on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @03:31PM (#17434552)
        > I honestly hope they DON'T ditch the pulp fiction feel of it.

        [Int. ancient temple. Indy's female love-interest-du-jour has a cartoonish Nazi at gunpoint.]

        Indy: Bring out the Gimp.
        Nazi: The Gimp is sleeping, Herr Jones.
        Love-interest-du-jour: It's fantastic! The chamber must extend 60 meters...
        Indy: Shit, they ain't got the metric system in ancient Egypt. They wouldn't know what the fuck a meter is.
        Love-interest-du-jour: Then what would they call it?
        Indy: A cubit.

        [Love-interest-du-jour accidentally shoots Nazi in the head, splattering brains everywhere.]

        Love-interest-du-jour: Oh man, I shot that Nazi in the face.
        Indy: Why the fuck did you do that!
        Love-interest-du-jour: Well, I didn't mean to do it, it was an accident!
        Indy: Oh man I've seen some crazy ass shit in my time...
        Love-interest-du-jour: Chill out, man. I told you it was an accident. You probably set off a booby trap by stepping on that "X" right there.
        Indy: "X" never, ever marks the spot, bitch!
        Love-interest-du-jour: Hey, look man, I didn't mean to shoot the son of a bitch. The gun went off. I don't know why.
        Indy: No, let me ask you a question. When you came in here, did you see a hieroglyphic out in front of this temple that said Dead Nazi Storage?
        Love-interest-du-jour: Indy, you know I ain't seen no...
        Indy: Did you see a hieroglyphic out in front of this temple that said Dead Nazi Storage?
        Love-interest-du-jour: [pause] No. I didn't.
        Indy: You know WHY you didn't see that hieroglyphic?
        Love-interest-du-jour: Why?
        Indy: 'Cause it ain't there, 'cause storing dead Nazis ain't my fucking business, that's why!

         
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by Hatta (162192)
        What the entertainment industry lacks currently is light stuff like pulp fiction, be it books, movies, or tv shows

        Are you kidding? Light stuff is all there is in the entertainment industry. It's all 100% fluff. When was the last time you saw a movie or tv show that had something important to say?
    • by forkazoo (138186)
      On the other hand, twenty-some odd years later... hey, an Indiana Jones that took place in the sixties might have real potential.


      You know, I was thinking the exact same thing. At first, I dismissed the project out of hand, but now that I think about it, it actually has some potential. Lucas will neither be writing nor directing, and the 60's could be an interesting setting for Indiana Jones.
    • hey, an Indiana Jones that took place in the sixties might have real potential.

      IMDb lists Natalie Portman as a rumored cast member. [imdb.com] So in case the movie doesn't live up to its potential, just add some hot grits and we'll all go watch it anyway. :-P

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by barzok (26681)
      The movies were set in the 1930s, not the forties.
    • by greenguy (162630) <estebandido AT gmail DOT com> on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @01:29PM (#17433054) Homepage Journal
      Also, all three may have been shot in the eighties, but they took place in the forties,

      The open sequence in Raiders says "Peru, 1936."
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by plsander (30907)
      Remember, Dr. Jones did drink from the Grail....
  • by moore.dustin (942289) on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @12:42PM (#17432408) Homepage
    Another great set of films to have its legacy tarnished by trying to cash in on it one... last... time...

    Hopefully 2007 ushers in a year in which remakes, sequels, and adaptations give way to original and creative stories and ways to tell them.
    • by caluml (551744) <slashdot AT spam ... OT calum DOT org> on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @12:46PM (#17432474) Homepage
      Hopefully 2007 ushers in a year in which remakes, sequels, and adaptations give way to original and creative stories and ways to tell them.

      Uh, fraid not. [bbc.co.uk]

    • Another great set of films to have its legacy tarnished by trying to cash in on it one... last... time...

      The great thing is, you don't have to go see it if you don't want to. Or see it, then pretend it never happened. Just like I did with the Highlander series...
      • Highlander was great!

        They made one fantastic movie and then they made a one good series.

        Fortunately they never made any sequels or spinoff series from those.

        And it was always strange to me how Babylon 5 ended on Season 4, episode 21. No ending but i guess they couldn't think of a good ending so they just stopped it there.
    • Another great set of films to have its legacy tarnished by trying to cash in on it one... last... time...

      It can be avoided.

      Crazy at it may sound, just about every review of Rocky Balboa observes that it's easily the best since the original. OK, not as good as the original but still one to improve the legacy overall and not detract from it.

      The secret appears to be:
      • Act with respect to the legacy of what's gone before.
      • Respect that the character has aged and tell an appropriate story to that aging
      • Dispense wi
    • by mobby_6kl (668092)
      Well, if Sylvester Stallone, of all people, managed to create an excellent conclusion after four increasingly lame sequels, I'm sure Steven Spielberg (yep, George "Jar-Jar" Lucas isn't directing this one) can do it too.

      As the other poster said, you don't have to watch it if you don't want to. I still haven't seen the last two Star Wars movies, and not planning to do so.
  • by p3d0 (42270) on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @12:42PM (#17432410)
    Lucas said he and Steven Spielberg recently finalized the script for the film. "It's going to be fantastic. It's going to be the best one yet," the 62-year-old filmmaker said
    This from the guy who can be heard in the making of the Phantom Menace saying about Jar Jar Binks: "we've never had a character this funny before".
  • So much for never (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jandrese (485) <kensama@vt.edu> on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @12:42PM (#17432416) Homepage Journal
    Does anybody else remember when Indiana Jones's hat was deposited in some Hollywood museum (under glass) and they made a press conference about how there would never be another one? Apparently Lucas doesn't. Presumably he was holding out for the script that allowed him to shoot the entire movie in CG except for Harrison Ford.
  • You know, the old guy that Jones goes to for information/help.

    Definitely not a main character in an action movie. What was that awful "computer" movie he was just in?
  • by Peter Trepan (572016) on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @12:45PM (#17432456)

    That'll make Indiana Jones Jr. old enough for something like Indiana Jones and the House Committee on Un-American Activities.


    HCUUA: Sign the confession!

    Jones Jr.: Gimme the whip!

    HCUUA: No time to argue. Sign the confession, we give you the whip.

    Jones Jr.: (signs the confession) Gimme the whip!

    HCUUA: Adios, señor. (guards grab Indiana Jones Jr.)

  • Is it really necessary for Lucas to defecate on another one of our beloved 80s trilogies?

    I suppose it is...since he couldn't float another turd across if it wasn't held up by the nations collective nostalgia. Any magic he allegedly had 'back in the day' has clearly faded, or been retarded by senility.

    • by simm1701 (835424)
      Remember that when lucas wrote the original star wars trilogy he had the help of a professor of mythology, a close friend of his. This is why IV-VI play like epic mythos.

      Unfortunately he died before I-III were written, even more unfortunately lucas went ahead anyway.
    • Re:Oh boy! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by oni (41625) on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @01:07PM (#17432738) Homepage
      > Any magic he allegedly had 'back in the day'

      Yeah. Allegedly. In truth, what has lucas ever done that wasn't hokie and childish? The original Star Wars was actually pretty good, but Lucas deserves little credit for that. He lucked out in a major way with Harrison Ford, and Harrison Ford saved Star Wars. Try to imagine the movie with just whiny little Luke Skywalker. It just doesn't work.

      Case in point, there is a video on youtube of behind the scenes footage from Empire Strikes Back. There is a great scene in Empire where Solo is being lowered in the carbonite pit and Leia shouts to him, "I love you!" Han looks up at her and say, "I know"

      What a great scene! Well guess what, Lucas originally wrote it this way:
      Leia: I love you
      Han: I love you too.

      Stop for a moment and let the deep, penetrating suckiness of those two lines seep into your being. George Lucas, sitting at his typewriter, no doubt in his underwear, actually typed that, and actually thought it was a good idea. He typed that crap, then he sat back and looked at what he had done and said, "hell yeah, I'm a bloody genius."

      Fortunately, when it came time to film that scene, Irvin Kershner was calling the shots and Lucas was (presumably) in a crypt somewhere. Harrison Ford looked at the script and said, "this sucks" and Kershner agreed and they changed it. And we all remember Empire Strikes Back as a great movie.

      Well, it is a great movie, but no thanks to Lucas.

      If only we had known the truth, then maybe we wouldn't have been so shocked some years later when we were treated to Lucas' drivel in the form of such brain-numbing lines as "omfg sand is the suxor it gets in my eye LOL!!!11" and my personal favorite, "Noooo!!!!"

      God, I hate George Lucas.
      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by discord5 (798235)

        Let me improve your feeble script

        Lucas originally wrote it this way:
        Leia: I love you
        Han: I love you too.

        Luke: NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

        George Lucas : I'm a bloody genius

        such brain-numbing lines as "omfg sand is the suxor it gets in my eye LOL!!!11"

        "zomg teh force is strong in dis 1, i can tell from his milk-of-chloreines"

        Random Star Wars fans, I AM George Lucas. Together we shall rule the universe as father and son.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Bobtree (105901)
        > Yeah. Allegedly. In truth, what has lucas ever done that wasn't hokie and childish?

        THX 1138. This is a classic work of science fiction, not fantasy adventure, and is fairly serious throughout. Even the directors-cut expanded CG-updated version is relatively unspoiled and watchable.
      • Re:Oh boy! (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Jtheletter (686279) on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @02:13PM (#17433546)
        Harrison Ford looked at the script and said, "this sucks" and Kershner agreed and they changed it.

        If only it had been such an intentional alteration. In fact, the scene had so many takes that Ford had heard "I love you" so many times he finally replied "I know" half jokingly. They thought it fit Solo's character better and stuck with that line. The whole movie had to be re-edited at great expense because the first version was terrible. To get the movie we ended up with many of the scenes go right until the last frame of film that was shot to get them to work.
        • Re:Oh boy! (Score:5, Interesting)

          by Kelson (129150) * on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @07:07PM (#17436942) Homepage Journal
          One of the memorable fight scenes in Raiders of the Lost Ark came about in a similar way. During the chase through Cairo, Indy was supposed to have a long fight with a swordsman. Harrison Ford was sick the day they were going to shoot the scene, and asked Spielberg if they could shorten the scene. The result: The guy flashes his swords around, and Indy just pulls out his gun and shoots him. A classic Indy moment that wasn't in the script.
  • by lbmouse (473316) on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @12:46PM (#17432482) Homepage
    "All three of the earlier movies were shot in the 80s. How well do you think this character is going to translate into a movie made today?"

    Most of us who saw the originals are still alive today. Why wouldn't the characters translate well? The 80's were NOT that long ago. Sheesh!
    • by Civil_Disobedient (261825) on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @01:10PM (#17432782)
      The 80's were NOT that long ago. Sheesh!

      I know how you feel, but remember when your parents kept telling you when you were a kid about how cool the 60s were, and it felt like they were talking about a different geological era? Well, that's what these kids today think about the 80s. And much like our parents told us, we can tell today's youth that their music sux0rs compared to the stuff we had back in our day.

      Of course, they were right.
  • I absolutely love the Indiana Jones movies. I don't think the fact that the originals were made in the 80s will have a whole lot to do with how the new movie holds up as much as how they approach the character now that Harrison Ford is 20 years older.

    I read a rumor somewhere (rotten tomatoes I think) that many of the old principals were going to come back, including the females from Raiders & Temple of Doom, which could be cool.

    All in all, I hope they don't try to make Ford too much younger like
  • No new ideas (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Silver Sloth (770927) on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @12:47PM (#17432498)
    Is it me or is there a staggering paucity of new ideas around at the moment. If you discount the remakes and the 'let's do another one's there's precious little around now that's truly original. Much as I loved the Indianna Jones movies can't we have a new hero once in a while.
    • Re:No new ideas (Score:5, Insightful)

      by SamSim (630795) on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @02:07PM (#17433488) Homepage Journal

      There are plenty of new ideas around. Thousands, millions of them. You can bet your bottom dollar that Hollywood is absolutely crammed to bursting with smart, dynamic writers with amazingly edgy, groundbreaking, intelligent film scripts, any one of which could, if made, become an iconic classic, a milestone in modern cinema, a fixture of pop culture to come. You have your ideas, I'm sure. I know I do too. There is no shortage of ideas.

      The problem is the, studios don't care about movies. They don't care about creating new icons. They care about money. And nothing else. And when you want to make money, you don't take risks, you make safe movies. Cash cows. Sequels to existing successful movies are by far the most reliable of these. Even most original movies you will find slot neatly into pre-existing genre templates. There's the teen comedy movie, the action movie, the romantic comedy, the animated kids' movie, and so on, and so on. It's all numbers.

      The other problem is the viewing audience. They don't want to see new things. While there is less money at stake, they, too, want a safe movie. They go to movie theaters to see something they are pretty sure will entertain them. Out-there, avant-garde movies do not appeal to the general public - at least, not to the most profitable movie-going demographics. Therefore making a stunningly imaginative new movie is risky - it's a risk for punters to see it, which makes it a risk for studios to make it, which is why they are so rarely made.

      • Re:No new ideas (Score:4, Informative)

        by RexRhino (769423) on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @05:07PM (#17435622)
        Also, movies are a global market. An explosion translates far better into a foriegn language than subtle dialog. Special effect blockbusters do much better overseas than a witty drama (much of which can be lost in the translation).

        That being said, there are more indie movies available now that there ever were... you just have to see them on cable, or on netflix, or whatever.
      • I remember when I was about 12 years old, my Dad was trying to talk me into seeing this movie about an archeologist searching for some ancient jewish artifact. I couldn't imagine anything more boring sounding. "Dad, I don't wanna see some dumb archeology movie, it sounds boooooring! I don't care if Han Solo is in it. It's still gonna be dumb!" Well he and my Mom dragged me along to see it anyway. We were a bit late because of my foot dragging. We walked into the Villa Theater (huge wraparound screen t
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Hadlock (143607)
      Stop going to mainstream theaters. Try out an art house theater. In Dallas alone, there are two separate art house theater chains(!) (Angelika & Landmark). Most movies approach or go well beyond the 2 hour mark, due to character development and plot. You'll never see a sequel in one of those theaters, and many of them have budgets in the 20-50 million dollar range, and top ranked actors like Edward Norton, (Painted Veil), Brad Pitt (Babel), or George Cloony/Toby MacGuire (Good German).. Doogie Houser st
  • by ofcourseyouare (965770) * on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @12:47PM (#17432500)
    From TFA...

    "George, Harrison and I are all very excited," Spielberg said, according to The Hollywood Reporter.

    I thought George Harrison has passed away? Or are they bringing him back as well as Indy? Just amazing what those boys at ILM can do...
  • How well do you think this character is going to translate into a movie made today?

    The character is timeless. Similar characters abound in Norse Sagas and Greek Myths for example. As to whether the actor needs to be replaced, depends on the filmmakers. I would personally say yes, even a good director will have issue making him credible - so change him. I would also say that adding an hour of exposition on a trade embargo and a floppy eared jive talking sidekick would be a terrible terrible terrible mistak

  • by j00r0m4nc3r (959816) on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @01:00PM (#17432656)
    "Indiana Jones and the Metamucil Drink"
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      Ya know, these jokes were rampant regarding the new Rocky movie. Have you seen Harrison Ford or Sly lately? Take a real good look, then go to the corner and cry like I did after watching the new Rocky movie. Despite the years on these guys, I would wager a hefty sum that either of them on their worse day are in better shape than 3/4's of us /.'ers.

      Now what THAT means is a whole other question...
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by sharkey (16670)
      "Dr. Jones! DR. JONES! Boxers or briefs?"

      "Depends..."
  • by FatRatBastard (7583) on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @01:01PM (#17432666) Homepage
    All three of the earlier movies were shot in the 80s. How well do you think this character is going to translate into a movie made today?

    Depends on who has the most influence on the movie: if Spielberg then I think it'll be a fun romp, if Lucas then I'm afraid it'll turn into a moralistic pile o' crap (see "Star Wars Prequels").

    Lucas has already said he's tried to reedit the earlier movies to make Indy more "heroic" (I believe that he wanted to edit or remove the "Indy pulls his guns on the sword wielding baddies and shots 'em dead on the spot" scene from the first film a'la "Greedo shoots first". Spielberg wouldn't allow him).
    • by geoffspear (692508) on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @01:22PM (#17432954) Homepage
      What an idiot. I don't care whether Greedo shot first, but that scene was by far the funniest thing in the entire Indiana Jones series, and removing it would be as dumb as letting Lucas write dialog of any kind.
    • by YetAnotherDave (159442) on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @02:29PM (#17433712)
      I've heard that the scene with the crazy sword-spinning guy was another
      Ford improvisation - they had planned an elaborate sword vs. whip duel
      (Indy had lost his gun someplace) but Ford was too sick to film it
      and suggested "can't I just shoot him?".
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by tsotha (720379)

      Bah. The only thing Spielberg guarantees is some overly cute, sappy kid. I hate cute kids in my adventure movies.

      It's like he saw how successful the cuteness was in E.T. and decided to put it in every movie. Well, every movie that wasn't designed to depress me.

  • Harrison Ford will provide the voice of Indiana Jones but the "person" you see on screen will be a CGI recreation of Indiana Jones based on footage from the previous 3 movies.
  • Indiana Jones and the Craftmatic Adjustable Bed.
  • I'm really sorry they are going back to the well for this.
  • by Ingolfke (515826) on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @01:15PM (#17432844) Journal
    River Phoenix signing up as Indy's son? He did a good job in the last movie. Is he even available?
  • I'm delighted to be back in business with my old friends

    Old is indeed the good word.
    I wonder if the movie is about finding the fountain of youth.
  • by C0rinthian (770164) on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @01:17PM (#17432874)
    ...and they are in peril.
  • by Ingolfke (515826) on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @01:31PM (#17433088) Journal
    that this was a sign of the coming of Duke Nukem Forever?
  • by jpellino (202698) on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @01:36PM (#17433162)
    "Indiana Jones and the Prostate of Doom"

  • by porkchop_d_clown (39923) <mwheinz&me,com> on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @02:03PM (#17433458) Homepage
    All three of the earlier movies were shot in the 80s.

    Oh, man. I read this and thought "that can't be right!" - then I looked it up and now I just feel old.
  • by the computer guy nex (916959) on Tuesday January 02, 2007 @02:47PM (#17433916)
    This movie has been in the works for easily 10 years. There have been dozens of scripts by multiple writers that have been repetitively rejected.

    In order to preserve the original trilogy as one of the best in American film history, only a damn good script would make it past Ford/Lucas/Spielberg.

    Personally? I can hardly wait another year and a half for it. A fourth movie is long overdue.

Reference the NULL within NULL, it is the gateway to all wizardry.

Working...