Please! There's no contest here

[ Reply ] [ The Indyfan Forum ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Ultraman Tiga from ts002d07.las-nv.concentric.net on December 17, 1999 at 02:32:11:

In Reply to: A young Indy opinion posted by GCR on December 16, 1999 at 22:03:40:

: : There's been some talk on this forum about who makes a better Young Indy, River Phoenix or Sean Patrick Flannery. I don't have an opinion about this one way or the other. My question is this.
: : For those who think River Phoenix is the better Indy, do you think it's because he's a better actor than Flannery? Or do you think his portrayal benefits from the fact that he's worked with Harrison Ford in the past? Phoenix played Harrison's son in "Mosquito Coast."

: I personally liked both of them, and think both are (or were in Phoenix's case) fine actors. However, I think Phoenix is still believable in the part due to the fact that he studied actor Harrison Ford's mannerisms before taking on the role, and had worked previously with him. Flannery is a good actor, but not right as Indy. C'mon, he seems way too naive for Indy, even Phoenix didn't seem that naive when he played Indy at 13!!! I just think the scoundrel quality of the part, plus some of the mannerisms, was lost in the Young Indy chronicles. I still enjoyed them, but the character didn't have that same quality that the Phoenix and Ford portrayals had. Flannery just seemed to much of a goodie-goodie in the role. That and what the hell was up with his hat? It looked more worn out and beat up than it did in the films! That always bothered me too, otherwise, it was a great show!
: -GCR

Finally, a post worth responding to. Pheonix was okay, but it was just an impression of HF and nothing more. Flanery was not necessarily a better actor, but he was certainly better in the part. At plenty of times, he outshined HF (especially when thinking of Last Crusade). There is some truth to your Flanery being a goodie-goodie theory, but that's the way the part was written (hence the "young" part of the title) and that's the way the directors wanted it played for. My only beef really is with Hollywood Follies, which takes place after Indy's been to war, and there's no way he'd be the wuss they made him out to be after all he'd been through. Then, you couldn't really place the story at any other time in Indy's life since he's busy throughout all the rest of it, and the story couldn't exactly call for a main character that was hard-edged and steely. For that fault, Hollywood Follies is still a lot of fun though. You just have to think of it outside of the cirle, so to speak, attempting to being a self-contained film.

Anyway, that's my take on tbat, Later dudes.

TIGA



Follow Ups:



Post a Followup:

Name:    
E-Mail:  
Subject: 
Comments:

Optional:

Link URL:   
Link Title: 
Image URL:  


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