Re: Should they or shouldn't they....

Posted by Steve from ppp-136.COL.cableone.net on April 04, 2000 at 20:33:50:

In Reply to: Re: Should they or shouldn't they.... posted by mlgm on April 04, 2000 at 07:15:19:

:
: : I guess everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I want to voice mine, just in case silence is misconstrued as a general consensus. To me two things are very important regarding Indy 4. The story, and Ford. I want the story to be as good as Raiders, and I want Ford playing the role of Indiana Jones. Personally I don't want to see a series of Indy movies, cashing in on the success that Ford has given them. To me Ford is Indy, and no one, I repeat, no one can replace him in that role. If he is too ancient to do the movies, then let his work stand, don't make any more. I just can't imagine anyone else playing the character as well as he has. Like it or not, his personality is entrenched in that character, and to remove it, would be destroying the persona we have come to know as Indiana Jones. For that matter, removing any of the 3 people originally involved in the making of the movies, would be something I would not want to see. If we can't have Ford, Spielberg, and Lucas involved in the new Indy movie, just let sleeping dogs lie. There will be plenty of other adventure movies to enjoy without committing heresy. Steve

: Could you or someone else that feels way, explain it to me? I guess I've always liked the characters better than the actors, because in the words of someone I just can't remember now, The actors are just pretending but the characters mean every word they say. When I see someone do a role well, I enjoy it, I cherish it, but to me it doesn't preclude someone else doing it too. If everyone felt like that we wouldn't be enjoying Shakespeare, Tennessee Williams, Shaw, or any of the rest of the great writers today, because someone has given wonderful performances in all their roles, many preserved for ever on film. I can easily imagine others doing Indiana Jones or James Kirk or any of the really wonderful TV and movie characters that have been invented in the last fifty years. The Hawkeye Peirce in the movie MASH and the TV show have many differences, but I cherish both. Both were done by truly wonderful actors giving the character their own spin. Which one would you be without? I wouldn't miss either one. Maybe its because I see of lot of theater (there's more amazing theater going on in the Midwest than most people on the coasts imagine) but I frequently see the same play with different actors, and from their different interpertations of the same character I gain so much insight into the play, and the writer, I cherish that experience. Neither performance destroys the other, instead it enhances it. The same with different directors, stressing different parts of the play and its themes. All adds to richer, deeper, more enlightening experience.

I don't think that I can explain it, not being a very literate person, half-miseducated if you will. But here goes. The authors that you have mentioned all have written highly thought of pieces, that stand alone regardless of who plays the characters when converted into a play or film. The Indy movies are not like this in my opinion. Our first Indy experience involved Ford, Spielberg, and Lucas. Our impression of Indiana Jones is as much Ford, as the character he portrays. The flavor of the movies, the feel, is a combination of the 3 men working together to create what we all know as Indiana Jones. My tremendous attraction to these movies goes beyond just the story line, the plot or whatever. To me it would be close to impossible to recreate what these men have done. As a teenager I read all of the 007 novels by Ian Fleming. When the first movie came out, I could hardly wait to see it. What a let down! In my minds eye, I had already formed an image of Bond. What I saw on the silver screen was not the Bond I had come to love. And on top of that, the movie was only vaguely like the novel it was supposed to portray. Each succeeding movie only got worse until I refused to even watch them. This is the same way that I feel about the idea of someone else playying Indy, or someone else directing it. regards, Steve

Follow Ups:

The oldest argument on Indyfan.com! Rob Roy 17:52:25 4/05/2000 (0)

Post a Followup:

Name:    
E-Mail:  
Subject: 
Comments:

: : 
: : :      I guess everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I want to voice mine, just in case silence is misconstrued as a general consensus. To me two things are very important regarding Indy 4. The story, and Ford. I want the story to be as good as Raiders, and I want Ford playing the role of Indiana Jones. Personally I don't want to see a series of Indy movies, cashing in on the success that Ford has given them. To me Ford is Indy, and no one, I repeat, no one can replace him in that role. If he is too ancient to do the movies, then let his work stand, don't make any more.  I just can't imagine anyone else playing the character as well as he has. Like it or not, his personality is entrenched in that character, and to remove it, would be destroying the persona we have come to know as Indiana Jones. For that matter, removing any of the 3 people originally involved in the making of the movies, would be something I would not want to see. If we can't have Ford, Spielberg, and Lucas involved in the new Indy movie, just let sleeping dogs lie. There will be plenty of other adventure movies to enjoy without committing heresy.    Steve

: : Could you or someone else that feels way, explain it to me?  I guess I've always liked the characters better than the actors, because in the words of someone I just can't remember now, The actors are just pretending but the characters mean every word they say.  When I see someone do a role well, I enjoy it, I cherish it, but to me it doesn't preclude someone else doing it too.  If everyone felt like that we wouldn't be enjoying Shakespeare, Tennessee Williams, Shaw, or any of the rest of the great writers today, because someone has given wonderful performances in all their roles, many preserved for ever on film.  I can easily imagine others doing Indiana Jones or James Kirk or any of the really wonderful TV and movie characters that have been invented in the last fifty years.  The Hawkeye Peirce in the movie MASH and the TV show have many differences, but I cherish both.  Both were done by truly wonderful actors giving the character their own spin.  Which one would you be without?  I wouldn't miss either one. Maybe its because I see of lot of theater (there's more amazing theater going on in the Midwest than most people on the coasts imagine) but I frequently see the same play with different actors, and from their different interpertations of the same character I gain so much insight into the play, and the writer, I cherish that experience. Neither performance destroys the other, instead it enhances it.  The same with different directors, stressing different parts of the play and its themes.  All adds to richer, deeper, more enlightening experience.

:    I don't think that I can explain it, not being a very literate person, half-miseducated if you will. But here goes. The authors that you have mentioned all have written highly thought of pieces, that stand alone regardless of who plays the characters when converted into a play or film. The Indy movies are not like this in my opinion. Our first Indy experience involved Ford, Spielberg, and Lucas. Our impression of Indiana Jones is as much Ford, as the character he portrays. The flavor of the movies, the feel, is a combination of the 3 men working together to create what we all know as Indiana Jones. My tremendous attraction to these movies goes beyond just the story line, the plot or whatever. To me it would be close to impossible to recreate what these men have done. As a teenager I read all of the 007 novels by Ian Fleming. When the first movie came out, I could hardly wait to see it. What a let down! In my minds eye, I had already formed an image of Bond. What I saw on the silver screen was not the Bond I had come to love. And on top of that, the movie was only vaguely like the novel it was supposed to portray. Each succeeding movie only got worse until I refused to even watch them. This is the same way that I feel about the idea of someone else playying Indy, or someone else directing it.   regards, Steve

Optional:

Link URL:   
Link Title: 
Image URL:

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