I dunno. I'm looking forward to it. At least it's Harrison Ford doign what he does best, and getting away from all those really mediocre thrillers he's been making:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9GwtRsOYSI

The clip shows how unoriginal Hollywood is in its thinking. But I thought THE FUGITIVE was good, as was PRESUMED INNOCENT. The rest? Meh.
That said, I'd rather eat a bowl of bad dates than pay $10+ to watch Indy 4.

It's one thing to blame Hollywood, but you know films like that don't get lit without a bankable star - so Ford should be more selective, to say the least, and maybe start backing the more interesting films he used to make, like "The Mosquto Coast," or "Blade Runner."

I just get the idea that he's a guy who can really act and cares about his craft, but in the end just wants a paycheck and to be left alone.

Yeah, he pretty much proved that with the Tom Clancy movies and esp. with Firewall. All in all, pretty craptacular. And I think Indy 4 will be moe of the same. It's a movie no one was clamoring for--and it's a movie Ford once said he would never make. (Actually, it as the general idea of doing more sequels that he was opposed to.)

What's the difference between making the fourth in an actual series and making the same damn half-assed domestic thriller over and over again, just with different titles?

Honestly, I can't remember the last time Ford was in something I've wanted to see, and this is an iconic actor for me, so it feels like he's really been trying not to make films that will last. I mean, really, if he doesn't want to make a big-budget SpielLucas film, fine, but it's not like he's gone off to do great actorly work in exciting, small-budget independent films. He's made an endless stream of studio crap, those two-word title films that you can spend two hours of your life watching and a few weeks later not only find it impossible to recall the title - "Internal Doubts?" "Fallen Sons?" - you'll have to think hard if you even saw the film.

It's like George Clooney ran off with Ford's career, or something.

Look at this list of forgettables he's made since "The Fugitive," his last good film:

Crossing Over (2008)
Firewall (2006)
Hollywood Homicide (2003)
K-19: The Widowmaker (2002)
What Lies Beneath (2000)
Random Hearts (1999)
Six Days Seven Nights (1998)
Air Force One (1997)
The Devil's Own (1997)
Sabrina (1995)
Clear and Present Danger (1994)

Real string of classics, there. He should do IJ4 for free, as penance.

Funny, I've only seen one movie from your list--Clear and Present Danger--and only because Ford was in it--otherwise I would never have bothered. And that was back when he was more relevant.
So that pretty much proves your point.
I think Tom Hanks may have snagged up some of his roles as well (and I don't mean his string of 90s "rom-coms").
I think Indy 4 will be just as irrelevant (and not ireverent, as it should be) as all the other movies in your list.
I seriously doubt I will see the new Indy movie in theatres. (I still haven't seen Spider-Man 3, and don't know if I ever will. Either I've outgrown these kinds of movies, or the directors who once thrilled me with such movies have outgrown their craft.)
Will the new Indy movie redeem Ford? I seriously doubt it.

I dunno. Raimi is no Speilberg,* but it's true that the Indy films ran out of gas for the sequels. The Last Crusade is a definite improvement on T.O.D., though, so there's hope.

*Meaning that, having seem SM3, I think Raimi has gone around the stylistic overkill bend, perhaps never to return, whereas Spielberg only seems to keep getting better. I make no bones about my love of Spielberg's late career run starting with "A.I." - he's a much better director now than when he made the first three IJ films, so there's an off chance that if Lucas doesn't put too much of his fat flanneled ass in there and Ford turns up and hits his marks (as he puts it, 'running, jumping and falling down'), it stands a good chance of being a very good movie.

I'm sure the new Indy movie will rake in the dough, but I'm saving my ten bucks for something else...

That new 'massage' place around the corner from work?

Somehow I don't think ten bucks would cover ANY kind of massage.
("In my day, a nickel bought you a happy ending--and you still had enough money left over to buy a loaf of bread, a container of milk, and a stick of butter!)