Re: Revisionist history...

Posted by Laurie Jensen from proxy2-external.frmt1.sfba.home.com on September 22, 1999 at 13:24:48:

In Reply to: Revisionist history... posted by ROB T. on September 21, 1999 at 22:18:11:

: I've noticed on this forum that whenever anyone questions the motives of any of the characters in the Indy films everyone starts screaming, "Revisionist history" and gripes about "Political Correctness."
: Sometimes that's a valid complaint but not always.
: When I questioned the reasoning for having Shorty and Anakin do the things they do it was defended by bringing up that children were less valued in the thirties. I don't think that Indy would have put Shorty in that situation in the thirties anymore than he would've in the nineties.
: I disagree with the situation in the films because it implies that someone on the set of these films made a conscious decision to treat these characters this way. I don't feel that was the case. I think they just didn't think about it at all and I have a problem with that. It shows a certain carelessness on the filmmakers part that would be okay if Lucas and Spielberg were lessor directors. Since they are at the top tier of filmmakers I think it's alright to hold them to a higher standard than say some guy who just got his first film assignment.
: Both of these problems could have been solved very easily without taking anything away from these films. In "Temple of Doom" Indy could have told Shorty to stay in the village and Shorty could have sneaked out and followed Indy and Willie.
: In "Phantom Menace" they only needed to change Anakin's motive for participating in the pod race and given Qui Gonn some other way to get ahold of a hyperdrive system.
: Both questions fixed and neither film loses anything.
: I feel that both films took the easy way out and both films suffer because of it.
: It has nothing to do with political correctness, it's just logical.

I understand what you're saying but I tend to agree with others: the situation is not unbelievable given the times. What does bother me about the Shorty situation is the glorification and idealization of this kid. Are we really supposed to believe this little child is kicking the crap out of dangerous men twice his size? Honestly, why would Indy have brought him along on his adventures, from a purely stategic line of reasoning? You're absolutely right about leaving Shorty behind. If I were Indy, I would have dumped Shorty and Willie off at the village, and gone after the stone by myself. Willie had shown herself to be ineffectual and annoying, while Shorty, no matter how scrappy, was too young to realistically help Indy in a threatening battle with the Thuggees. They just held him back, unlike say Marion, who could pull her own weight in a fight, or other Indy helpers like Sallah, Jock, etc. This is where the movie steps over the line, regardless of how cavalierly children's safety may have been treated in the 1930's. There's just no excuse for Shorty's karate chopping heroics but pandering to young boys yearning for adventure, and a peer to admire and emulate. Anakin at least had the force, how can they explain Shorty?

Laurie

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup:

Name:    
E-Mail:  
Subject: 
Comments:

: : I've noticed on this forum that whenever anyone questions the motives of any of the characters in the Indy films everyone starts screaming, "Revisionist history" and gripes about "Political Correctness."
: : Sometimes that's a valid complaint but not always. 
: : When I questioned the reasoning for having Shorty and Anakin do the things they do it was defended by bringing up that children were less valued in the thirties. I don't think that Indy would have put Shorty in that situation in the thirties anymore than he would've in the nineties.
: : I disagree with the situation in the films because it implies that someone on the set of these films made a conscious decision to treat these characters this way. I don't feel that was the case. I think they just didn't think about it at all and I have a problem with that. It shows a certain carelessness on the filmmakers part that would be okay if Lucas and Spielberg were lessor directors. Since they are at the top tier of filmmakers I think it's alright to hold them to a higher standard than say some guy who just got his first film assignment.
: : Both of these problems could have been solved very easily without taking anything away from these films. In "Temple of Doom" Indy could have told Shorty to stay in the village and Shorty could have sneaked out and followed Indy and Willie.
: : In "Phantom Menace" they only needed to change Anakin's motive for participating in the pod race and given Qui Gonn some other way to get ahold of a hyperdrive system.
: : Both questions fixed and neither film loses anything.
: : I feel that both films took the easy way out and both films suffer because of it.
: : It has nothing to do with political correctness, it's just logical.

: I understand what you're saying but I tend to agree with others:  the situation is not unbelievable given the times.  What does bother me about the Shorty situation is the glorification and idealization of this kid.  Are we really supposed to believe this little child is kicking the crap out of dangerous men twice his size?  Honestly, why would Indy have brought him along on his adventures, from a purely stategic line of reasoning?  You're absolutely right about leaving Shorty behind.  If I were Indy, I would have dumped Shorty and Willie off at the village, and gone after the stone by myself.  Willie had shown herself to be ineffectual and annoying, while Shorty, no matter how scrappy, was too young to realistically help Indy in a threatening battle with the Thuggees.  They just held him back, unlike say Marion, who could pull her own weight in a fight, or other Indy helpers like Sallah, Jock, etc.  This is where the movie steps over the line, regardless of how cavalierly children's safety may have been treated in the 1930's.  There's just no excuse for Shorty's karate chopping heroics but pandering to young boys yearning for adventure, and a peer to admire and emulate.  Anakin at least had the force, how can they explain Shorty?

: Laurie

Optional:

Link URL:   
Link Title: 
Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The Indyfan Forum ] [ FAQ ]