Yes and no. a good response....

Posted by Michaelson from leospace047.utsi.edu on October 11, 2000 at 14:14:53:

In Reply to: Re: Yes - no? A good debate: posted by Indy Fan 0238230 +infinity on October 10, 2000 at 19:18:03:

There are many of us here at the forum who are and have been connected one way or another with the film and video industry, so you're not the Lone Ranger. I understand and agree with most of your points, but on the other hand, these are the same type arguments offered by one side of the costume industry in Hollywood. They fervently believe that costumes should be considered like the leaves of the trees...there to be enjoyed for the moment, but allowed to wither and fall to the earth to disappear, with only the memory of their past glory on our mind, never to be revisited. Uh, not for this movie goer. I'm a firm believer in conserving what ever items that work, and can continued to be enjoyed, whether it's a costume item, or a fictional character that actually worked in a movie. This discussion has come up many times, and where James Bond is one franchise that is brought, the other one is the Tarzan franchise. Tarzan's have come and gone, and we all have our favorites. The same discussion has brought up Sherlock Holmes, and once again, we all have our favorites. When Basil Rathbone died, Holmes did not die with him, and yet there are hard core Holms fans who refuse to watch any other actor in the part. I'm partial to Jeromy Britt, but that's another topic... My point is that on the other side of the coin, the "art" of the craft aside, folks liked the character of Indiana Jones. There are series that have continued that should have been put to bed years ago simply because the almight dollar was what drove it to the theaters, not the pursuit of the storyline of the ficitional character (as discussed above) , but there have been several that did work quite well, and the franchise did not suffer from the experience. I agree, Ford created the character, but I do not personally feel he has the patent on the characterization. As has been discussed before, it's a shame we never got the chance to see River Phoniex continue any further in his exploration of the Indy character other than in the beginning of LC. I think he did an admirable job in duplicating Ford's characterization and movements, which I believes shows that the character can be depicted by a good actor, once the ground work is covered. I don't think that someone should ever attempt to RE-create the character, as we do indeed KNOW how Indy should be depicted, and that's as Ford originally created him. I'm sure all this is as clear as mud, as a lot of my postings have been lately (grins), but hopefully the content has SOME merit. As usual, good discussion folks. Regards. Michaelson

: I do agree with you on your points...
: You'll never hear me say Ford is too old or might get too old. (unless body parts
: fall of and such) Hollywood can work magic with makeup..
: Did you all know that the guy who plays the old priest in exorcist
: was really like 20 something? yeah, good make up even back then..
: It can be reversed.

: I also agree that if a good story/plot could develope, it'd be worth it...but let's think this over.
: It's been over 10 years now since the last Indy film. Gee...we still
: have Spielburg going strong..Lucas coming back w/ SW, and Ford still
: making good movies... Hmm.. Sure their schedules conflict, but we all
: know there has yet to be a good script they've settled with thus far.
: If nobody can write a good story that they (the only three people in
: the world who should have a say in what's good and what's not with Indy anyhow)
: then who'se to say once their gone, that some budding director can jump in
: and take over when the guys who created it have to wait decades for good
: scripts to develop? hey, I love the films as much as the next guy, but one thing
: I've learned working in film is you can never force art. And that's
: what Indy is...an art. Therefore, once the masterpiece dies..why not
: let it be? We don't add to Mona Lisa or even films like Godfather,
: why must we force Indy to be created beyond a part 4 (which is probably
: the last one for the dynamic trio)

: Indy Fan 32412338120 +889

Follow Ups:

Re: Yes and no. a good response.... Doc 10:21:40 10/12/2000 (1)
- Re: Yes and no. a good response.... indy fan 1208108 12:59:25 10/12/2000 (0)
Re: Yes and no. a good response.... Indy Fan 0481208402 20:10:05 10/11/2000 (1)
- Just a quick follow up Michaelson 10:39:11 10/13/2000 (0)

Post a Followup:

Name:    
E-Mail:  
Subject: 
Comments:

: There are many of us here at the forum who are and have been connected one way or another with the film and video industry, so you're not the Lone Ranger. I understand and agree with most of your points, but on the other hand, these are the same type arguments offered by one side of the costume industry in Hollywood. They fervently believe that costumes should be considered like the leaves of the trees...there to be enjoyed for the moment, but allowed to wither and fall to the earth to disappear, with only the memory of their past glory on our mind, never to be revisited. Uh, not for this movie goer. I'm a firm believer in conserving what ever items that work, and can continued to be enjoyed, whether it's a costume item, or a fictional character that actually worked in a movie. This discussion has come up many times, and where James Bond is one franchise that is brought, the other one is the Tarzan franchise. Tarzan's have come and gone, and we all have our favorites. The same discussion has brought up Sherlock Holmes, and once again, we all have our favorites. When Basil Rathbone died, Holmes did not die with him, and yet there are hard core Holms fans who refuse to watch any other actor in the part. I'm partial to Jeromy Britt, but that's another topic... My point is that on the other side of the coin, the "art" of the craft aside, folks liked the character of Indiana Jones. There are series that have continued that should have been put to bed years ago simply because the almight dollar was what drove it to the theaters, not the pursuit of the storyline of the ficitional character (as discussed above) , but there have been several that did work quite well, and the franchise did not suffer from the experience. I agree, Ford created the character, but I do not personally feel he has the patent on the characterization. As has been discussed before, it's a shame we never got the chance to see River Phoniex continue any further in his exploration of the Indy character other than in the beginning of LC. I think he did an admirable job in duplicating Ford's characterization and movements, which I believes shows that the character can be depicted by a good actor, once the ground work is covered. I don't think that someone should ever attempt to RE-create the character, as we do indeed KNOW how Indy should be depicted, and that's as Ford originally created him. I'm sure all this is as clear as mud, as a lot of my postings have been lately (grins), but hopefully the content has SOME merit. As usual, good discussion folks. Regards. Michaelson

: 
: : I do agree with you on your points...
: : You'll never hear me say Ford is too old or might get too old.  (unless body parts
: : fall of and such)  Hollywood can work magic with makeup..
: : Did you all know that the guy who plays the old priest in exorcist
: : was really like 20 something?  yeah, good make up even back then..
: : It can be reversed.

: : I also agree that if a good story/plot could develope, it'd be worth it...but let's think this over.
: : It's been over 10 years now since the last Indy film.  Gee...we still
: : have Spielburg going strong..Lucas coming back w/ SW, and Ford still
: : making good movies...  Hmm..  Sure their schedules conflict, but we all
: : know there has yet to be a good script they've settled with thus far.
: : If nobody can write a good story that they (the only three people in
: : the world who should have a say in what's good and what's not with Indy anyhow)
: : then who'se to say once their gone, that some budding director can jump in
: : and take over when the guys who created it have to wait decades for good
: : scripts to develop?  hey, I love the films as much as the next guy, but one thing
: : I've learned working in film is you can never force art.  And that's
: : what Indy is...an art.  Therefore, once the masterpiece dies..why not
: : let it be?  We don't add to Mona Lisa or even films like Godfather,
: : why must we force Indy to be created beyond a part 4 (which is probably
: : the last one for the dynamic trio)

: : Indy Fan 32412338120 +889

Optional:

Link URL:   
Link Title: 
Image URL:

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