Glad you brought this up

Posted by Groo from ppp-207-193-5-202.kscymo.swbell.net on January 11, 1999 at 18:58:51:

In Reply to: Anybody watch the films in chronological order? posted by JeffW on January 11, 1999 at 15:46:59:

Okay, early on when I first stumbled into this forum I was tutored in Indy-ology when I discussed how I belived Last Crusade was a vast departure on the personal character of Indiana Jones, what with the pious, overdone call to arms, "That belongs in a museum"(ARRRGHHH that turns my stomach every time I see it). I believe that Indiana Jones is more of what Steven Spielberg brought to the character - a gritty, determined, not exactly a boy scout man who could stretch the limits of what is considered a good guy, not the Roy Rogers holier than thou attitude displayed in Crusade. With this in mind someone instructed me that the character had evolved/changed into the man we see in Last Crusade.

Ex. Raiders - Determined - never give up, total disregard for the rights of nations and their artifacts
Temple - Loss of self - greedy Sergio Leone type character out for personal glory until he understands the power of the stone
Crusade - Puritan - obsessed with an artifact from his childhood and reverting into an all elbows and thumbs teenager when confronted by his father.

This was close to what was relayed to me - sans the added comments. Now if you look at the surface this is a possible explanation for the change in the character. But what of continuity you ask? This, my fellow posters, is the kicker. If you watch to films in chronological order the evolution of character theory is shot to hell. Which brings me to my point, after what Indy witnessed in India in Temple, how could he have possibly told Marcus that, "I don't believe in magic, alot of superstious hocus-pocus."? Also Marcus states that five years ago he would have gone after the ark himself. If this is true and Marcus did in fact once participate in acquisition of artifacts, and he really is as bumbling a bufoon as his character is portrayed in Crusade, it is a wonder he was still alive in 1938. I wonder how many times Indy had to save Marcus' ass in the past.
Wishing writers would do their homework Regards,
Groo

Follow Ups:

I thought that is the way it was? Tevya (the Fiddler) 22:43:02 1/12/99 (12)
- Re: I thought that is the way it was? JeffW 23:14:52 1/12/99 (11)
  - Re: I thought that is the way it was? Quest 12:26:27 1/13/99 (10)
    - Re: I thought that is the way it was? Rik Duel 13:23:49 1/13/99 (9)
      - TOD magic I have my doubts Kay 11:25:26 1/18/99 (8)
        
        Re: TOD magic I have my doubts Bryan 19:37:08 1/19/99 (7)
        
        Re: TOD magic I have my doubts-2 Kay 12:04:29 1/20/99 (6)
        
        Re: TOD magic Michaelson 12:23:35 1/20/99 (5)
        
        Re: TOD magic Jiliac the Almighty 12:57:26 1/20/99 (4)
        
        Re: TOD magic Jiliac the Great 12:58:53 1/20/99 (3)
        
        Let's recap.... Michaelson 07:39:32 1/21/99 (2)
        
        Re: Let's recap.... Groo 12:13:47 1/21/99 (1)
        
        Re: Let's recap.... Michaelson 13:21:21 1/21/99 (0)

Post a Followup:

Name:    
E-Mail:  
Subject: 
Comments:

: Okay, early on when I first stumbled into this forum I was tutored in Indy-ology when I discussed how I belived Last Crusade was a vast departure on the personal character of Indiana Jones, what with the pious, overdone call to arms, "That belongs in a museum"(ARRRGHHH that turns my stomach every time I see it). I believe that Indiana Jones is more of what Steven Spielberg brought to the character - a gritty, determined, not exactly a boy scout man who could stretch the limits of what is considered a good guy, not the Roy Rogers holier than thou attitude displayed in Crusade. With this in mind someone instructed me that the character had evolved/changed into the man we see in Last Crusade.

: Ex. Raiders - Determined - never give up, total disregard for the rights of nations and their artifacts
:     Temple  - Loss of self - greedy Sergio Leone type character out for personal glory until he understands the power of the stone
:     Crusade - Puritan - obsessed with an artifact from his childhood and reverting into an all elbows and thumbs teenager when confronted by his father.

: This was close to what was relayed to me - sans the added comments. Now if you look at the surface this is a possible explanation for the change in the character. But what of continuity you ask? This, my fellow posters, is the kicker. If you watch to films in chronological order the evolution of character theory is shot to hell. Which brings me to my point, after what Indy witnessed in India in Temple, how could he have possibly told Marcus that, "I don't believe in magic, alot of superstious hocus-pocus."? Also Marcus states that five years ago he would have gone after the ark himself. If this is true and Marcus did in fact once participate in acquisition of artifacts, and he really is as bumbling a bufoon as his character is portrayed in Crusade, it is a wonder he was still alive in 1938. I wonder how many times Indy had to save Marcus' ass in the past.
: Wishing writers would do their homework Regards,
: Groo

Optional:

Link URL:   
Link Title: 
Image URL:

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