Re: Yes and no. a good response....

Posted by Doc from spider-tr031.proxy.aol.com on October 12, 2000 at 10:21:40:

In Reply to: Yes and no. a good response.... posted by Michaelson on October 11, 2000 at 14:14:53:

: 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

One thing that struck me as I was reading the above was the mention of other movie franchises who have had different actors play the same character, whether it be Sherlock Holmes, Tarzan, James Bond, Jack Ryan or whoever. The difference between all of these and Indy is that they began their lives as literary characters, within the pages of a book. Indiana Jones started his life on the screen, personified by Harrison Ford. So you see, fans of Sherlock Holmes did not all imagine the same face when they read the books, but when fans think of Indy, we all see Harry Ford, since that's the way it's always been. I think you'll find it much more difficult to recast Indiana Jones than it would ever be to find a new Bond, or Ryan. Anyone else have any thoughts on this?

-Doc

Follow Ups:

Re: Yes and no. a good response.... indy fan 1208108 12:59:25 10/12/2000 (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

: 
: One thing that struck me as I was reading the above was the mention of other movie franchises who have had different actors play the same character, whether it be Sherlock Holmes, Tarzan, James Bond, Jack Ryan or whoever.  The difference between all of these and Indy is that they began their lives as literary characters, within the pages of a book.  Indiana Jones started his life on the screen, personified by Harrison Ford.  So you see, fans of Sherlock Holmes did not all imagine the same face when they read the books, but when fans think of Indy, we all see Harry Ford, since that's the way it's always been.  I think you'll find it much more difficult to recast Indiana Jones than it would ever be to find a new Bond, or Ryan.  Anyone else have any thoughts on this?

: -Doc

Optional:

Link URL:   
Link Title: 
Image URL:

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