Should Henry Jones Sr., Sallah, Shorty, or Willie have been in KOTCS?

Which one would you have liked seen in KOTCS

  • Total voters
    95
AndyLGR

AndyLGR

Active member
Was Oxley always in the script? I was under the impression he was a late addition to the story.

I was disappointed that Connery wasnt in it, but after seeing KOTCS it made me wonder if he recognised the film might not be all that great? It would be interesting to know what changes they made once Connery wasnt going to be onboard.

Anyway, before the movie opened I was intrigued and pleased to see that Karen Allen was back in as Marion, but I think they handled the relationship between the main characters very badly, it didnt seem to fit right and she wasnt given the chance to add some balls to the character. She seemed incidental and arguably expendable to the story imo.

Its trying too hard to shoe horn in a familiar character to make the audience want to like / see and feel familar with the film. And for KOTCS I dont think it worked. Its something Lucas did with the SW prequels with varying degrees of success.

I like the way they went with TOD in that they had no characters in there from Raiders and making it a prequel ensured their were no references to them either. Personally if they did another one I'd like it to be with new characters with Indy.
 
A

arkfinder

New member
Sallah. End of story. It would have been a bit closer to the heart if Indy and Sallah had the talk about Marcus & Henry sr.
 
Cole

Cole

New member
AndyLGR said:
Was Oxley always in the script? I was under the impression he was a late addition to the story.

I was disappointed that Connery wasnt in it, but after seeing KOTCS it made me wonder if he recognised the film might not be all that great? It would be interesting to know what changes they made once Connery wasnt going to be onboard.

Anyway, before the movie opened I was intrigued and pleased to see that Karen Allen was back in as Marion, but I think they handled the relationship between the main characters very badly, it didnt seem to fit right and she wasnt given the chance to add some balls to the character. She seemed incidental and arguably expendable to the story imo.

Its trying too hard to shoe horn in a familiar character to make the audience want to like / see and feel familar with the film. And for KOTCS I dont think it worked. Its something Lucas did with the SW prequels with varying degrees of success.

I like the way they went with TOD in that they had no characters in there from Raiders and making it a prequel ensured their were no references to them either. Personally if they did another one I'd like it to be with new characters with Indy.
Click to expand...
Seeing Marion back was a real treat......and I thought it worked intelligently within the story. I have to disagree the relationship is handled badly........to me, it probably has the 2nd most satisfying personal story behind 'Last Crusade.'
 
Cole

Cole

New member
arkfinder said:
Sallah. End of story. It would have been a bit closer to the heart if Indy and Sallah had the talk about Marcus & Henry sr.
Click to expand...
Mmm, can't completely disagree.......everyone loves Sallah.

But I thought Stanforth was a great new addition.
 
U

Udvarnoky

Well-known member
AndyLGR said:
Was Oxley always in the script? I was under the impression he was a late addition to the story.
Click to expand...

A character named Harold Oxley can actually be found in the Frank Darabont draft, and although he was a rather different character, it's reasonable to assume that by virtue of the fact that he was carried over at all that he was always part of the basic storyline that ultimately became the finished film. I'm not saying he didn't undergo any changes of purpose along the way, but I think it's pretty clear that Connery choosing not to be involved in the project did not lead to his creation.
 
A

ATMachine

Member
Udvarnoky said:
A character named Harold Oxley can actually be found in the Frank Darabont draft, and although he was a rather different character, it's reasonable to assume that by virtue of the fact that he was carried over at all that he was always part of the basic storyline that ultimately became the finished film. I'm not saying he didn't undergo any changes of purpose along the way, but I think it's pretty clear that Connery choosing not to be involved in the project did not lead to his creation.
Click to expand...
Actually it was Vernon Oxley in the Darabont draft. Too close a name to Vernon Dursley of Harry Potter for my comfort! Then again, seeing as how Darabont named two characters in his script "Carl Stalling" and "Reggie Nalder," I suppose it could've been much worse...
 
AndyLGR

AndyLGR

Active member
Cole said:
Seeing Marion back was a real treat......and I thought it worked intelligently within the story. I have to disagree the relationship is handled badly........to me, it probably has the 2nd most satisfying personal story behind 'Last Crusade.'
Click to expand...
Agreed on LC, Indy and his dads chemistry is what makes that film great for me.

But for KOTCS, it was as if they were wrote Marion and Indy to be arguing continuously in a comedy way which didnt work for me. I wanted to see a more human reaction to their relationship and the fact they also have a son. It just seemed too forced to try and squeeze her in there, plus she had some of the worst cheesy one liners of the movie. It was a total change from how she was dominant in her scenes in Raiders to see her mugging her way through some of her scenes in KOTCS, shes a better character than that imo and it was one of the things that really disappointed me about KOTCS, because the Marion Indy relationship I was looking forward to.
 
W

Wilhelm

Member
I think that the problem is that the Indy / Marion relationship was the main theme of Raiders. In Darabont's draft it was also the main theme and that was too similar to Raiders. His relationship was fully explored in Raiders.

I think that each new movie must explore new aspects of Indy's character and in KOTCS it was his loneliness and the desire of creating a family (Mutt and Marion) being respectable (Professor Henry Jones Jr). So the use of Marion was only an extended cameo like Sallah and Marcus in Last Crusade.
 
Cole

Cole

New member
AndyLGR said:
Agreed on LC, Indy and his dads chemistry is what makes that film great for me.

But for KOTCS, it was as if they were wrote Marion and Indy to be arguing continuously in a comedy way which didnt work for me. I wanted to see a more human reaction to their relationship and the fact they also have a son. It just seemed too forced to try and squeeze her in there, plus she had some of the worst cheesy one liners of the movie. It was a total change from how she was dominant in her scenes in Raiders to see her mugging her way through some of her scenes in KOTCS, shes a better character than that imo and it was one of the things that really disappointed me about KOTCS, because the Marion Indy relationship I was looking forward to.
Click to expand...
It's still Indiana Jones. Usually the personal relationships are discovered along the journey, and I think it's the same thing here.

From her very first line ("Get your hands off me you Ruskie son of a *****!" = very Marion) and Indy's boyish grin......I just loved having her back. I thought their banter was witty and comedic. And I thought it stayed that entertaining until the end, which was a satisfying conclusion to me. It's unique because we all saw 'Raiders of the Lost Ark,' so we all know the backstory, we are all familiar with these characters.......and I think that makes it even more special.

But Marion isn't in the movie that much - at least not compared to 'Raiders of the Lost Ark.' She shows up in the 2nd half, she's not like the "main sidekick" this time around. So I don't know, maybe that's why people are disappointed.
 
AndyLGR

AndyLGR

Active member
Cole said:
From her very first line ("Get your hands off me you Ruskie son of a *****!" = very Marion) and Indy's boyish grin......I just loved having her back. I thought their banter was witty and comedic. And I thought it stayed that entertaining until the end, which was a satisfying conclusion to me.
Click to expand...
Theres the problem for me, I didnt find the humour to be funny, but I accept that others will like it. But I was hoping to see the same kind of spark they had together in te first film, not a comedy parody of it (n)
 
Attila the Professor

Attila the Professor

Moderator
Staff member
AndyLGR said:
Theres the problem for me, I didnt find the humour to be funny, but I accept that others will like it. But I was hoping to see the same kind of spark they had together in te first film, not a comedy parody of it (n)
Click to expand...

Indeed. The line was "very Marion" because she had almost precisely the same line in the first film.
 
Cole

Cole

New member
AndyLGR said:
Theres the problem for me, I didnt find the humour to be funny, but I accept that others will like it. But I was hoping to see the same kind of spark they had together in te first film, not a comedy parody of it (n)
Click to expand...
Just because her role contains comedic elements does not make it a parody.

Her opening appearance is clearly a wink to 'Raiders' (hands on hips: "Indiana Jones..."), but it doesn't make it a parody. It was a great introduction to her character halfway through the film.

And if Indy was going to end up with a woman, who else would it be than Marion Ravenwood? Like I said, very satisfying to see her again after no mention of her in 'Temple of Doom' (set before 'Raiders' anyway), or 'Last Crusade.'

If the film took 5-10 minutes for Marion and Indy to have a serious discussion about their relationship, or something like this - it would be out-of-tune for Indy and misdirected towards its audience.

I think their banter in the camp and on the truck manages to be both entertaining and manages to fill the audience in on the status of their relationship.
 
AndyLGR

AndyLGR

Active member
Cole said:
Just because her role contains comedic elements does not make it a parody.

Her opening appearance is clearly a wink to 'Raiders' (hands on hips: "Indiana Jones..."), but it doesn't make it a parody. It was a great introduction to her character halfway through the film.

And if Indy was going to end up with a woman, who else would it be than Marion Ravenwood? Like I said, very satisfying to see her again after no mention of her in 'Temple of Doom' (set before 'Raiders' anyway), or 'Last Crusade.'

If the film took 5-10 minutes for Marion and Indy to have a serious discussion about their relationship, or something like this - it would be out-of-tune for Indy and misdirected towards its audience.

I think their banter in the camp and on the truck manages to be both entertaining and manages to fill the audience in on the status of their relationship.
Click to expand...
I just would have liked to have seen it handled with some emotion when they meet and not for Indy to join in a comedy routine, thats all.

The fact her entrance is reminiscent of Raiders doesn't make it good for me. Within that 5-10 min screentime of them meeting again, the quicksand and then to the back of the truck - the scenes between Indy, Marion and Mutt just didnt do it for me.

Like I said, some real emotion to handle the revelation of a son, plus meeting up with his old flame / true love would have added some depth to it. Instead they went for cheap laughs. I just don't get why they used Marion for the cheap laughs and cheesy one liners, (her instructions to Mutt when he's fencing are particularly bad). How she was written in this film seems totally against what we think of her to be or what I think of her to be at least. When film makers try too hard to funny invariably it doesnt work.

The family interaction and bond between chracters could have been a real emotional strong point in KOTCS, just as it was in TLC.
 
StoneTriple

StoneTriple

New member
Montana Smith said:
Connery in a cameo would leave us wanting more Connery, and without him (and Marcus) we have the pathos of Indy's loneliness in a world that's threatening to leave him behind.
Click to expand...

I agree. One of his close friends ended up turning against him as well. I think his emotional isolation made for a much better character.
 
M

Montana Smith

Active member
StoneTriple said:
I agree. One of his close friends ended up turning against him as well. I think his emotional isolation made for a much better character.
Click to expand...

The more I think about that, the more profound it becomes in the story. Older Indy, last seen in the 1930s, is now fighting to keep his reputation both academically and in the field of adventuring. Academically he's being branded a communist and temporarily removed; with the adventuring he's trying to do the things that age is making harder.

Because he is so isolated, he's trying to prove himself amongst those who haven't witnessed him in his prime (his father, Sallah, Shorty, Marcus, Willie etc). The only one who's with him from the start of the film is Mac, and he's double crossing him anyway. Later, he meets Marion, who he knows he really has nothing to prove to (apart from his ability to remain a one-woman guy), but also Mutt, who at first treats him without much respect, as just another old man in a modern world.

The main story element then becomes the idea that age is no barrier. It would be fitting, then, if KOTCS was the first in a second trilogy.
 
AnythingGoes

AnythingGoes

New member
As much as I would've wanted Willie to be in KotCS I really can't see how she would've figured in it. Henry Sr. would've been a greater choice and it would've been kinda fun to have Henry commenting on Marion and their lovechild, saying things like 'This is intolerable, Junior, you left your woman with child!' or something to that effect.
If only they could've gotten Connery to come out of retirment for just a little bit...:whip:
 
XanaduEli

XanaduEli

Member
AnythingGoes said:
As much as I would've wanted Willie to be in KotCS I really can't see how she would've figured in it. Henry Sr. would've been a greater choice and it would've been kinda fun to have Henry commenting on Marion and their lovechild, saying things like 'This is intolerable, Junior, you left your woman with child!' or something to that effect.
If only they could've gotten Connery to come out of retirement for just a little bit...:whip:
Click to expand...

it would have been funny to see Willie in competition with Marion :whip:

and i would have just loved Sallah to return
 
T

tambourineman

New member
I dont think any of them should have been in it really, there was enough fan-service in the movie to begin with I think. But since they did the father/son thing anyway I would have preferred it if they just used Short Round (re-cast of course). Maybe just made him one of Indy's students, following in Indy's footsteps, and Indy takes him along for the adventure. Would have been a preferable character to bring back than Marion I think.

I'm definitely glad there was no Salah. I love the character of course, but he's just Indy's friend and contact in the middle east, its not like he follows Indy around everywhere. It would be just too much fan-service forcing the character into an adventure that has nothing to do with his role and function in the Indy world.
 
Cole

Cole

New member
Short Round is like almost 40 today.......it would not be the same character we remember from 'Temple of Doom,' and I can only imagine the fan hate for ruining his character.

If Marion was not in the film.......would fans not say they would've wanted Marion back?

Well, we got Marion back and there's still some fans who are complaining.
 
M

Matt deMille

New member
My two (thousand) cents:

1) Indy Sr. Well, I had a chance to ask Sir Sean Connery this directly (at AFI), and his response was interesting. I was told to keep it private, but if you email me, I'll be happy to tell the tale. Trust me, it's a story seldom (if ever) heard on internet rumors.

2) All other characters, I believe, should have stayed away. They get like Tattoine in Star Wars -- We hear talk of thousands of worlds but we keep going to the same damn planet. Indy is a globetrotter, with friends and enemies everywhere. Keep the variety. Keep it fresh.

3) I *do* however like what many have suggested, that ALL previous characters have a cameo at Indy's wedding. Sallah as Best Man would have rocked!

4) Sallah. If anyone should have returned, I say bring on Sallah. JRD loves this role and would gleefully return in a heartbeat. Plus, despite his age, he's very capable of doing it. Short Round as an adult would've have the magic. Willie never had it. Others are dead. But Sallah, John Rhys-Davies, he's ready and capable, and his age wouldn't hurt the character in the least.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top