Should Indy die on film?

I don't think Indy should be killed of as he is a tribute to/modern version of the adventure heroes of yore. A time when young movie goers enjoyed serials with minimum production values, and would be treated to endings such as "can our hero escape in time, come back next week and find out!" No matter how impossible the situation, the hero always evaded certain death.

I think that since there are so few movies left in this saga, Indy should have a final end, and before Harrison does. I agree with Doc Whiskey, in the hands of Spielberg, it would be beautiful. In my version of Indy's demise, his death would have more of an ascension type quality to it. He would be consumed by a supernatural artifact in a non-bloody way. My preference would be a reunion with the ark, an artifact that has been referenced in all the chronological sequels to ROTLA. But it wouldn't have to be. In my mind, he would find himself in a position where he has to martyr himself for the greater good. After knowing what it is me must do, there would be a sequence in which any number of villains desperately attempt to gun him down to prevent him from achieving his goal. Indy would be scrambling towards his objective amid explosions, gunfire (maybe even gets clipped once or twice), earthquakes, crumbling moutains or collapsing buildings, cave-ins, all set to something like this... most notably, any of it after the first minute, with the violence and chaos muted by the score. As it plays in my head, there wouldn't be a dry eye in the house. Of course, I could be way off, and be the only person that thinks this is any kind of good idea. Maybe I'm just having a weird day, but I was playing out some visuals in my head while listening to this track earlier today and it put a little bit of a lump in my throat.

No he shouldn't. I don't have the faith that he could be killed effectively that it would be worth it.

In my mind I could see it three ways:
1/ Death and resurrection like an extension of Henry Senior's bullet wound. Eg. Some kind of near death experience that he gets pulled back from.

2/ Old age. Lying in a bed with his family watching and satisified with his lot he goes to sleep like Yoda.

3/ A final hurrah. Eg. In the middle of the film Indy is poisoned. He finishes the fight, and both he and Mutt collapse from exhaustion happy/not believing they made it. Whatever 'it' is. Mutt rolls over to pick himself up and turns to Indy but his dad doesn't wake up. Some kind of funeral scene. Lonely jacket and whip. Credits.

Lao_Che said:

3/ A final hurrah. Eg. In the middle of the film Indy is poisoned. He finishes the fight, and both he and Mutt collapse from exhaustion happy/not believing they made it. Whatever 'it' is. Mutt rolls over to pick himself up and turns to Indy but his dad doesn't wake up. Some kind of funeral scene. Lonely jacket and whip. Credits.

Click to expand...

Thats a good thought, but darn I cannot imagine watching that more than once.

Lao_Che said:

3/ A final hurrah. Eg. In the middle of the film Indy is poisoned. He finishes the fight, and both he and Mutt collapse from exhaustion happy/not believing they made it. Whatever 'it' is. Mutt rolls over to pick himself up and turns to Indy but his dad doesn't wake up. Some kind of funeral scene. Lonely jacket and whip. Credits.

Click to expand...

To answer the question, No. I don't think Indy should die on film. Isn't killing off characters like this usually a bad idea? Or in the very least, an idea that gathers bad results? Captain Kirk and Connor Macleod come to mind.

But if it had to be done...Lao_Che has a pretty good idea. Might I suggest that Indy's death happen at the end of the movie though?

Also, it would definitely have to end as a cliffhanger...Bad guys get away, Mutt wants revenge...during the funeral you could have Mutt explaining to Marion how important it is that he stops his fathers killers and retrieve the artifact that he and Indy were trying to protect...last lines of the movie could be of Mutt saying..."It ain't over yet...Trust me." Close up of Mutt putting on the fedora...black screen, roll credits.

What better way to get the audience behind a movie based on Mutt taking up the torch of Indiana Jones? REVENGE! Since Mutt is kind of a hot head, it would be in his character to want revenge...at this point, you could develop Mutt into traits that are more like Indy...totally make him go through the transformation from being out for blood to being humbled by whatever artifact he and Indy were trying to protect.

Sort of like in Temple of Doom...in the beginning, Indy wants fortune and glory...but they end, he realizes that his fortune and glory can't compare to the true power of the artifact...the hope that it gives to a village of people.

Less hope its better than the death of Captain James T Kirk.

Again, I don't think it should happen at all.

These "passing the torch" moments never really pan out the way they should.

FedoraHead said:

Less hope its better than the death of Captain James T Kirk.

Click to expand...

Oh My...

Maybe we could get a Dr Manhattan type disassembling...

RaideroftheArk said:

Also, it would definitely have to end as a cliffhanger...Bad guys get away, Mutt wants revenge...during the funeral you could have Mutt explaining to Marion how important it is that he stops his fathers killers and retrieve the artifact that he and Indy were trying to protect...last lines of the movie could be of Mutt saying..."It ain't over yet...Trust me." Close up of Mutt putting on the fedora...black screen, roll credits.

What better way to get the audience behind a movie based on Mutt taking up the torch of Indiana Jones? REVENGE! Since Mutt is kind of a hot head, it would be in his character to want revenge...at this point, you could develop Mutt into traits that are more like Indy...totally make him go through the transformation from being out for blood to being humbled by whatever artifact he and Indy were trying to protect.

Click to expand...

That would be a fine way to segway into a continuation of the franchise by way of a spin-off, but Mutt wearing a the fedora/becoming another Indy? That combined with the death of Indiana Jones would be too much to swallow all at once. Mutt is his own character, I think he would be perfect for a similar series revolving around around pure sci-fi, but not as "The Next Indiana Jones". It would be no less ridiculous for Marion to put on the hat.

Indy's brother said:

That would be a fine way to segway into a continuation of the franchise by way of a spin-off, but Mutt wearing a the fedora/becoming another Indy? That combined with the death of Indiana Jones would be too much to swallow all at once. Mutt is his own character, I think he would be perfect for a similar series revolving around around pure sci-fi, but not as "The Next Indiana Jones". It would be no less ridiculous for Marion to put on the hat.

Click to expand...

Well... I could see it both ways. I don't think it's that ridiculous or would be that too hard to swallow since at the end of KOTCS Mutt almost put his hat on. It's obvious that he admires Indy that much that he wouldn't mind taking up the mantle...or at least, that's what I got from him trying to put the hat on.

You can also look at it as almost a vehicle for Mutt's revenge. Perhaps by taking up the image of Indiana Jones, Mutt could cause some fear among his father's killers. Perhaps he could get them into thinking that Indy is still alive, however, Mutt could do things a little more aggressively...after all, his motivation is revenge, and this would keep it in the realm of Mutt being his own person.

Once again...I still don't think killing off Indy on screen would be a good idea. The character is too beloved and there's just no reason for it...Unless you really, really, really want to see another format that doesn't involve Indiana Jones but members of his family.

If that's the case...why not just try out a Mutt Williams adventure first? See how the audience responds to it. Name the movie something independent like "Raiders of the Lost Ark" with no indication who the main character is. If it's successful, and a continuing series could come of it, at that point gauge if Indy should be killed off.

Even with that, I still do not think it is necessary to show Indy's on screen death.

Is there an audience for Indiana Mutt? I suppose it's possible, but I wouldn't want it. Mutt has an adventurous spirit, but he doesn't channel nearly enough of an Indy vibe to replace him directly. He's a motorcycle riding greaser. Educated, sure, but not an archaeologist, not a teacher, his motivations and interests are/would be clearly different. Shoehorning Mutt into the role would feel too forced and awkward, hell even as far-out as GL is, he's admitted this himself. I just don't see any reason to slap a fedora on anyone but Indiana Jones' character. It would smack of desperation to keep the Indy-ness going. Of course, I should stop there, I'm pretty sure there's another thread about this here anyway.

Indy dying onscreen...as to the original question of whether or not it should happen, if it serves a purpose to the story, if it makes for a better film, and there is no doubt that another film won't happen, then I think "Sure, why not". Of course as someone else mentioned in this thread, it would be too easy to botch it up. The safe bet is to not do it. But if it was flawlessly done, I wouldn't have a problem with it. No matter what, it's interesting to think about.

RaideroftheArk said:

Again, I don't think it should happen at all.

These "passing the torch" moments never really pan out the way they should.

Click to expand...

Yea I hate the passing the moment also. I say if he did die, END IT! As for I like to see it become a Bond like line. Replace Ford (yes!) and go back to before Temple of Doom.

Indy's brother said:

Is there an audience for Indiana Mutt? I suppose it's possible, but I wouldn't want it. Mutt has an adventurous spirit, but he doesn't channel nearly enough of an Indy vibe to replace him directly. He's a motorcycle riding greaser. Educated, sure, but not an archaeologist, not a teacher, his motivations and interests are/would be clearly different. Shoehorning Mutt into the role would feel too forced and awkward, hell even as far-out as GL is, he's admitted this himself. I just don't see any reason to slap a fedora on anyone but Indiana Jones' character. It would smack of desperation to keep the Indy-ness going. Of course, I should stop there, I'm pretty sure there's another thread about this here anyway.
e too easy to botch it up. The safe bet is to not do it.

Click to expand...

I agree with one the Mutt thing and I think Indiana is a man of the 30's. That is one of the things I liked about KOTCS, we got to some him in a different time, pasted him prime. It's not something you see in movies a lot. If you did a Mutt movie it' the 50s or 60s and it just a different time and not not really a Jones movie anymore.

Yeah, I see what your saying.

My idea wasn't for Mutt to permanently take on Indy's gear and image and "be" the new Indiana Jones. I should have explained it better but as you said, there's a thread already dedicated to this.

Make it something like Zorro's death in the Mask of Zorro.

It's not as though Indiana Jones is like the Phantom, where the task is passed seamlessly from father to son, giving the impression that the Phantom never dies. I think the death of Indy should be the end of his story.

Moving Indy into the 1950s was a necessary evil, if we were to see Harrison Ford reprise the role. I can't see the point of continuing with Mutt, as he possesses none of the charm of the character that gave his name to the four movies.

I don't think Indy should die on film. It would be a needless effort and it would be depressing in what is essentially an uplifting movie series.

I also don't think the torcxh should be passed on to Mutt. Only very rarely do franchises survive the change of main actor. There are actually only two that pulled it off, in my eyes.

The first being James Bond. That works because they simply ignore the fact that it happens and we are all happy to participate in the suspending of disbelief.

The other is Doctor Who, where they came up with an excellent science fiction plotpoint that helped them replace a lead actor who was going into retirement. Probably the smartest descision on a tv show ever, allowing it to run almost indefinately.

Neither of these two options would work with Indiana Jones. Ford and the character are too intertwined.

If we want movies with Shia LaBoef at least give the guy his own character and let him be a hero without the bagage of the Indy films to burden him. The guy deserves better than that.

Joosse said:

There are actually only two that pulled it off, in my eyes.

Click to expand...

I would say that the Jack Ryan movies handled a change in actor with no issue in going from Alec Baldwin to Harrison Ford. However, I don't think it did going to Ben Affleck although that overall movie didn't help the cause.

It does appear that Star Trek will pull off the feat. At least, so far so good in my opinion.

Joosse said:

The first being James Bond.

Click to expand...

James Bond is interesting in that it has survived the changes despite itself. The first change from Sean Connery to George Lazenby was a media circus, and the resulting film was considered a mess. (Actually, I think OHMSS aged rather well because the story is one of the most powerful in the series. But still Lazenby's Bond is not what we expect.) After Connery's one movie return, Roger Moore took 3 films to settle in (The Spy Who Loved Me). He was sort of accepted as he had been TV's The Saint, so he made logical sense as Bond. But then after For Your Eyes Only, his performances are considered more parody of Bond than Bond. Timothy Dalton had the unfortunate spot of being the Bond they could get instead of the Bond they wanted - Pierce Brosnan. Of course, after 6 years, they got Brosnan and everyone was happy for a movie or two. Then the writing got bad as they ran completely out of Fleming material. Daniel Craig seems to have taken over nicely helped by a healthy update and Craig's powerful performance in Casino Royale. Again, like On Her Majesty's Secret Service, the character angle on Bond really helps balance the action so we get a solid well rounded movie. I think the later actors on the series were all helped by the fact that we now expect changes to the Bond actors every decade or so.

Perhaps this is the same for Dr. Who? I cannot remember the magazine, but I recently saw an article with a nice history on all the Doctors. I've never watched the show but our CTO who is British loved the article when I gave it to him.

Bringing this back to Indy (besides two of the Bonds appearing in Indy stories), I think the universe can accept an actor change if the conditions are right. Certainly, the actor has to be excellent at all the traits of the role. In this case that would be physical action, scholarly seriousness and on the feet resourcefulness. But as in Bond and Star Trek, the story has to be super engaging and built around character. If Daniel Craig had appeared in one of the weaker Bonds (say The Man With the Golden Gun or License To Kill), he might not have been so readily accepted.

By the way, I'm still against Indy dying on screen!

Joosse said:

The first being James Bond.

Click to expand...

Just remembered something from before Brosnan got the Bond role. There were rumors in Hollywood of switching Bond to a female lead and having her be Jane Bond. My cousin who was a producer at United Artists said it was never seriously considered.

This article I found by doing a Google search suggests it came up again before Craig landed the role, but again the idea was (rightly in my mind) ridiculed.

http://www.thehindu.com/thehindu/fr/2004/09/17/stories/2004091701880100.htm.

Sharon Stone, mentioned at the bottom of the article, was the actress that had been rumored in the early 90's as well.

Indiana Jones in the 50's..60's...Indiana Jones death,...etc.

This thread has taken some interesting turns, with very interesting and thought provoking opinions.

In this discussion of Indiana Jones' possible demise on screen however, one theme seems to be recurring.

It seems that these days anymore, with all of the enormously heavy weight of the 'Canon' and whatever, and with Harrison Ford's current, and accelerating geriatric condition.......it all just seems so ..........depressing.

Indiana Jones is being dragged down into oblivion by those who love him most.

They even want to kill him.

Strange. And very depressing.

There is talk of "Mutt" putting on the fedorah and carrying on in the 50's or 60's ...or maybe 70's.........I don't know.

OK.

But that's all kind of weird.

Can we transpose Indy's 1937 Shanghai club scene to Studio 54.......some time in the 70's.......with "Mutt" playing the Hero and Cher playing the role of Willy Scott?

We have to don't we? Because.........Harrison Ford IS Indiana Jones. So when he's old, Indy is old; when he dies, Indy dies.

We can NEVER go back! We can NEVER recreate the character in his element......the 1930's........Right? Because Harrison Ford IS Indiana Jones......and because Harrison Ford was X years old in the 80's and played a character in the 30's and so........because in 2010...........HE is Y years old and so that would make Indy..........Z years old,.........and so then ............(somebody give me a calculator)

Gives me a headache.

...........

Anyway, if they ever do kill Indy off on screen, I only hope that in the very last scene (and I think that we have discussed this before) it will be a funeral scene..................The Funeral of Indiana Jones.....but at the very end of the funeral scene.......after the eulogies have been delivered, and all of the handkerchiefs are wet, and the organ breaks into a resounding rendition of Amazing Grace..........................

Indiana Jones peeks over the edge of the choir loft at the assembled mourners below, puts his index finger to his lips, smiles, and winks at the organ player.

Indiana Jones can NEVER die!!