Is Indy a "Family hero" and a good role model for kids?

Is Indiana Jones a good role model for young kids?

  • Yes, he's a perfect role model.

    Votes: 18 46.2%
  • Not really but I don't mindmy kids watching the movies.

    Votes: 17 43.6%
  • NO WAY! He took advantage of teenage Marion amongst other things.

    Votes: 1 2.6%
  • I have NO idea...

    Votes: 3 7.7%

  • Total voters
    39

JuniorJones

TR.N Staff Member
Darth Vile said:
I'm left wondering whether or not you've actually even seen the movie... Perhaps Raiders of the Lost Ark is actually a euphemism for Indy's predilection for underage girls? (y)

I love Raiders and this is a pretty daft conversation but it's always interesting to understand a subtext to a scene, especially this one as I would say it's pretty clear what Lucas intention was in creating something
that, although fleeting, would have challenged the audiences perception of Indy in relation to their own morality. In the context of the film this was a misstep and Lucas has tried to rectify that.

Also, I apologise for the "Marion off to Nepal", I was a bit liberal with the facts, that's the politician coming out of me.

I think we should let the regular service of Indy news continue and part for other lands.
 
Last edited:

Finn

Moderator
Staff member
monkey said:
HJJNR, Sorry that you had to lie to your son. But just as when you prevented your son from seeing certain scenes from Indiana Jones movies, this once again proves the point that Jones is NOT a children's character.

The fact is that Indiana Jones shot the swordsman.....with a .455 Webley handgun......(pretty big bullet!). Yes he did. And he KILLED him. Dead.

Indiana Jones has killed a LOT of people, and hopefully he will kill a LOT more.

He will have intimate relations with many different women, .....outside of marriage.

He will rob graves.

Once again.........hopefully.

UNLESS, he gets Mr. Rogers' (currently vacant) gig.

Picture Indiana Jones telling you that "you're special......in your own special way..." as he removes his desert boots, hangs up his Webley, and puts on some comfortable slippers.

Saturday morning line-up: 9:00=Telletubbies, 9:30=Barney, 10:00=Indiana Jones' Neighborhood.

Pass the remote.
monkey, I'm shocked. There is stuff in this post so disheartingly off I don't how to dress it properly... but I'll try.

So...































The revolver Indy used to shoot the swordsman was a .45 S&W Hand Ejector Model 2, not a .445 Webley Green, which he didn't use until Last Crusade.



<small>Geeks rejoice.</small>
 
HJJNR said:
I can fully appreciate all the points you made here and from an adult thinking as a child, it makes sense. However, not once has my son (or daughters) picked up on any of the things in the way you mentioned. He has asked about Nazis and I didn’t lie to him, I watered it down a bit but hey, too much info and all that. I think, no I believe that a young boy watching Indy gives them a sense of adventure and yes some of his morals are to be judged but kids don't pick up on such things.OK some aspects of the movies can be a bit much for kids, hence my strategically placed 'Cough' over any swear words hee hee. (Doom bridge; "Oh *COUGH*")
To be sure this is how an adult would hear/interpret an innocent question. That a child may not have the moral template to apply to such behaviors is the point. How do you explain such actions to a child? How do you give them perspective to judge such ADULT themes noted? Your child may not have asked these questions...though they didn't use the same terms/language, mine have. (Plus I couldn't pass up the an attempt at comedy: is he trying to outdrink the monkey for the monkey's money? But they do follow the logic you set out for them).


I also employ the strategic cough, and pause for a bathroom break/snack break to FF questionable material. I also put subtitles on; it's helpful for foreign names and locations. There are all types of children, but I won't underestimate mine. I had a GREAT laugh when my son read ASS in the subtitles and instinctively coughed. He had no idea why I was laughing or that he had done it. But he knew the word and understood my tactic! Not all children are the same. But I'll err on their ability to ask me when they don't understand something, (as I remind them), and they do.

HJJNR said:
We then have merchandising that’s available for kids..aimed at kids. Lego Indy, dress up costumes, lunch boxes, annuals and so on (cost me a fortune). We can argue thats just about money and what not but I've never seen a stand in toys r us for a Saw3 doll or a hannibal Lecter lunch box...
But you have seen McFarlane's Movie Maniacs, from Freddy Krueger and Jason Voorhees, to Chucky, just as my kids have.

HJJNR said:
Like I said, all your points are valid and understandable but I don't think kids pick up on such things... kids are pretty face value when it comes to films. Watching Harry Potter I don't get questions like why does Voldermort (oops I mean 'you-know-who') hate Harry Potter and why is Snape so mean to him?
Children have instincts, it's up to parents to prepare them to understand them and when to act or not. I do get questions like that, and I'm grateful for them...and will continue to encourage them to tell me and not be afraid to share.

HJJNR said:
Whenever I take the kids on walks or trips, my son will run to grab his "Indy kit" as he calls it (Gas mask bag, foam bullwhip, trowel for digging, notepad etc). My nephew loves Superman and his Mum is terrified that when he has the costume on he'll try to "fly" out of an open window or top of climbing frame and heroes don't come much more squeaky clean than Superman.
As Bill Hicks said "If he thought he could fly, why didn't he take off from the ground first and try it out. There's one less doorknob in the world? Wooh! What a tragedy!"

There are qualities Indiana Jones has that are worthy AND fun...and like you those are the things I encourage in my children. I tell them: "you're supposed to imitate the GOOD things people do!" among other things, and I love seeing my boy have fun with a character who doesn't have superpowers.


HJJNR said:
I just don't see any poor examples that can come from being an Indy fan as a child. How old were you when you first saw Indy?
Well, I saw Indy first when I was 11 and I broke my brother's clavicle in a fake fight...those young reader things are targeted to sell to our youth. They are produced to sell, get em young, but the cinematic Indiana Jones is an adult with adult flaws, adult problems and adult solutions, no matter how fantastic.

(Wait till we get to the mixed message master Elsa Schneider! How DARE you kiss me! ...uh Daddy, why did she say, and do, and...)


Crack that whip said:
Hence my use of "FWIW," since I do indeed acknowledge the many shortcomings of the allegedly Ultimate Guide in matters pertaining to dating and chronology. That said, what better sources are there for Marion's birthdate? As I noted, Marion being 17 at the time of the affair does easily still fit...
Hence my follow of your lead. Better sources, I'd say that's to be determined, but the Ultimate Guide? A step up factually from Beam's "Off The Beaten Path", (barely). As for Marion being 17, no, she was a child, it was wrong and he knew it.

Originally Posted by Rocket Surgeon
The Crystal Skull novel puts a new spin on how they met...(the daughter of a teacher very well may have "skipped" a grade or two but a 15 year old in a graduate class?).
Crack that whip said:
Well, there you go. :p
There you go what? That it's as unlikely Marion was 15 in a graduate class as they continue to re-write and politically correct their youthful creative inclinations?

Crack that whip said:
He's always going to be rough, with some dark areas, but he was never intended to be an outright villain (not even in those early conceptual stages for Raiders), which is how he's being interpreted here. Some say it's his "darkness" that makes him interesting; I think this is not entirely off the mark, but not quite there either - I think it's his flaws which make him interesting, but that's not the same thing. At the end of the day, he's still a heroic figure, just not a perfect one. I certainly don't think he's a monster, or even a purely self-interested mercenary with no ideals at all, nor was he ever intended to be, and I'm frankly somewhat baffled by folks who apparently not only see him as one, but prefer him as one...
I think I agree with Sharkey, (maybe ;) ) to say he was never intended to be an adult hero is as crazy as saying that he's as much a "monster".
 
Last edited:

HJJNR

New member
I agree with what Rocket Surgeon is saying to a large extent. If we protect our kids from the "ify" scenes and words then it's not so bad and try not to avoid their questions of certain things, otherwise they will try to draw their own conclusions (adding 2+2 and coming up with 5). Any half decent parent will protect their kids from the bad content like myself and Rocket have said.

As I mentioned, my son asked about the nazis and I said they were (Are) a group of bad guys that want/ed to take over the world and destroy anyone who got in the way... watered down but question answered. Obviously that brought up other questions but as long as you spare the gruesome details, your child is clued up and has learned a bit of history. I think Rocket mentioned the difference between the films as good viewing and the man Indiana Jones as a role model and I think if we took the face value of the man IN the movies you have a scholar, adventure loving man who will protect himself and loved ones at any cost... he won't let evil prevail using the tools of the good. Ok so I'm not a religious person and am unsure of my belief in a higher being but if my kids ask me about god and heaven etc, I'll tell them what I was told as a child but without preaching or force feeding my (dis) beliefs.

Someone (not sure who) once said; "Show your kids the good things in life because the world will show them the rest".

If your child wakes up and thinks there is a monster under their bed, we tell them they aren't real...no such thing as monsters and comfort them until they go back to sleep. We don't tell them about the monsters that are out there in the world.

(Man, this thread is getting deep)
 

Crack that whip

New member
Rocket Surgeon said:
Hence my follow of your lead. Better sources, I'd say that's to be determined, but the Ultimate Guide? A step up factually from Beam's "Off The Beaten Path", (barely). As for Marion being 17, no, she was a child, it was wrong and he knew it.

Yeah, the Ultimate Guide is unreliable (as I did note myself, you know), but you appear to be arguing that it's so unreliable that anything it says has to be false, which I don't think is the case (and if so, then what? Marion's name isn't Marion? Indy's jacket is made of corduroy?). My point is that there isn't anything anywhere in the movies that says she was fifteen at the time of the affair. Pretty much the only source I can find that says she was is the story conference transcript, and they're still making things up in that.

Rocket Surgeon said:
There you go what? That it's as unlikely Marion was 15 in a graduate class as they continue to re-write and politically correct their youthful creative inclinations?

I simply meant I don't think she was 15.

Rocket Surgeon said:
I think I agree with Sharkey, (maybe ;) ) to say he was never intended to be an adult hero is as crazy as saying that he's as much a "monster".

Of course he's an adult hero; I never argued otherwise. I'm simply saying that being an adult hero doesn't necessarily mean he has to be scummy, nor does he have to be this completely amoral ultra-badass so many seem to conceive of him as being.
 
Crack that whip said:
Yeah, the Ultimate Guide is unreliable (as I did note myself, you know), but you appear to be arguing that it's so unreliable that anything it says has to be false, which I don't think is the case (and if so, then what? Marion's name isn't Marion? Indy's jacket is made of corduroy?).
Really? Is that what I seem to be arguing? (Yes you did so magnanimously and clearly after an example was proffered, to illustrate exactly WIW rather then the simply ambiguous "FWIW").:hat: You may as well have quoted Beam's Off The Beaten Path.:sick:
Crack that whip said:
My point is that there isn't anything anywhere in the movies that says she was fifteen at the time of the affair. Pretty much the only source I can find that says she was is the story conference transcript, and they're still making things up in that.
I'd say the story transcript trumps the "Ultimate Guide", but that's me. Also me: child ≠ 17. So we disagree...:hat:
Crack that whip said:
I simply meant I don't think she was 15.
Well alright!
Crack that whip said:
Of course he's an adult hero; I never argued otherwise.
Did I acuse you of arguing otherwise? ...or was I simply pointing out we're not arguing him as an outright villian, (a point that was made to balance out an equally far fetched idea that he's a "family hero") but a truly dynamic ADULT with ADULT flaws not intended for the consumption of children?
Crack that whip said:
I'm simply saying that being an adult hero doesn't necessarily mean he has to be scummy, nor does he have to be this completely amoral ultra-badass so many seem to conceive of him as being.
yes...I know it doesn't mean he HAS to be but what he's done can be described as such, and reasonably.
 

HJJNR

New member
I suppose it could be a question of: If your child grew up to be just like Indy, would you be proud or ashamed? :confused:
 

JuniorJones

TR.N Staff Member
Is Indy a Hero. Depends on the point of view.

Is Indy a Hero? Depends on the point of view.

When I watched films/television as a child, I viewed from them from a naive perspective.

I never saw the high camp of Batman, the formulaic nature of the A-Team, thought about the consequences of Starkey and Hutch killing anyone and had no idea wrestling was faked (Hey kids, if your reading this, I'm only joking, it's real).

Raiders was a rip-roaring adventure, lots of stunts, bad guys being off'd in various ways (even funny ways), there was girl, who acted like a boy, he saved her, they got together but I wasn't too interested in that and in the end two of the bad guys heads melted and another blew up. How cool is that!!

I walked out of that movie with one thought on my mind. How do I replicate any part of that movie with my mates and if were going to do it I'll be Indy. (Crazy paving took on a whole new lease of life)

Many years later I became a grown-up and unfortunately that naivety left me.

Batman was a bit silly (Bat-dance, anyone), A-team was tedious (Don't tell me that, Fool cos I ain't getting on that plane so lock me in that shed with all the heavy machinery), Starkey and Hutch conveniently forgot about killing anyone the following week. And, wrestling, well Batista became WWE champion, nothing fake about that.

As an adult I can pull apart the films and I suppose he wouldn't be much of a role model (but he's still the man, F**K yes!!) but to an eleven year old kid, I couldn't care less cos that guy went under a moving truck...for real.

How cool is that.:D

Written by juniorjones aged 10 and a half.
 
Last edited:

Indy's brother

New member
You don't have to understand WWII, or know about Nazi war crimes to see that they are clearly amoral killers in ROTLA. That Indy is against them kind of automatically casts him as the hero. I watched cowboys and indians in black and white shows as a child, and it didn't make me think that killing is ok. As far as Indy's morality and motives, he is simply human. If you need to see more darkness in his character you have to think long and hard about it and speculate on the importance and meaning of some utterances in the dialogue. That kind of conjecture is adult territory. Is he a "perfect" role model for kids? Maybe not, I guess...but he's not poisonous to the youth of the world, either. I let my 3 yr old watch snippets of the films, and it has truly captured his imagination. He wants to "fight bad guys". Nothing wrong with that. Are they children's movies? That depends on the age of the kid, really. I think that any kid can emulate Indy in the backyard or wherever without parental concern. The question of to me has more to do with how much gore a kid should see. The violence in the films can be a bit nightmare-inducing. Indy's character? Unless you feel the need to explain in detail what is intended or implied by Indy's scenes with the ladies, I think he's alright for kids. That's my opinion, anyway.
 

JuniorJones

TR.N Staff Member
I went to see Avatar with my 9 year old, he enjoyed it the same way I'd enjoy Indy except he was a bit confused to what was real.
 
I paraphrase Monkey: You let your child see snippets, that in itself is admission enough that Indiana Jones is NOT family fare.

As far as preteens, age is not a measure of maturity and as such it's up to you to decide when and how to expose your children to themes, which in Raiders includes drug abuse, gratuitous violence/horror, language and implied sexual content.

I love the Indiana Jones films but thematically and viscerally they are geared towards mature teens. But that's just me.

As far as mature teens, I think they are exactly the ones who pick up on the crass sexual themes: "I was a child..." and the drug abuse. The obscurity of the comments and their emotional impact tend to create more questions and here's to hoping your children speak to you about these things. At best you can use it as an opportunity to discuss/warn them of the dangers and in the case of some of my peers, they can idolize and immitate at whatever the cost.
 
Last edited:

HJJNR

New member
Rocket Surgeon said:
I paraphrase Monkey: You let your child see snippets, that in itself is admission enough that Indiana Jones is NOT family fare.

As far as preteens, age is not a measure of maturity and as such it's up to you to decide when and how to expose your children to themes, which in Raiders includes drug abuse, gratuitous violence/horror, language and implied sexual content.

I love the Indiana Jones films but thematically and viscerally they are geared towards mature teens. But that's just me.

As far as mature teens, I think they are exactly the ones who pick up on the crass sexual themes: "I was a child..." and the drug abuse. The obscurity of the comments and their emotional impact tend to create more questions and here's to hoping your children speak to you about these things. At best you can use it as an opportunity to discuss/warn them of the dangers and in the case of some of my peers, they can idolize and immitate at whatever the cost.

So are you basically saying that the ideals and morals of Indy are OK for kids to look up to but the actual themes of the movies themselves are a bit too much, not exactly suitable for young viewers? I agree about the kids having questions about certain elements of the films but isnt that just "kids for ya"? Like having to explain why the sky is blue and how big space is?

I think you and I have very similar views (albeit a bit out of synch) to parental guidance, as far as films are concerned. My son doesn't imitate Indy as such, yes he has the costume and all the garb but I think he (not sure if this is the right way to describe it) is inspired by him and he is a good lad and I'm very proud of him. Let's put it this way, there could be worse heroes for a young boy. :whip:
 
HJJNR said:
So are you basically saying that the ideals and morals of Indy are OK for kids to look up to but the actual themes of the movies themselves are a bit too much, not exactly suitable for young viewers? I agree about the kids having questions about certain elements of the films but isnt that just "kids for ya"? Like having to explain why the sky is blue and how big space is?

Well I was at Citizens Bank Park with my children for the Phillies opening day last year and a one of the group was getting salty with his language, so I turned and asked them nicely to if they wouldn't mind dropping the vernacular, that I didn't want to explain to my kids what some of those words meant. They obliged.

Similarly I don't want an Indiana Jones film to be my childs introduction to loose sexual mores. It's not like he enjoyed anything about Willie but her looks, but had no problem when it came to putting it to her. That's not the kind of morals I'm interested in instilling in my children.

As I said before, I want them to copy the GOOD things people do, and Indy has some redeeming qualities. I just think impressionable children, (preteens) have plenty of time to mature before Indiana Jones is appropriate. They have other things to be concerned with, like why the sky is blue...and there is plenty of suitable entertainment for them until they're mature enough to handle Drinking Contests/Death Cults/Nazi Sluts.
 
Last edited:

Montana Smith

Active member
Indy's brother said:
You don't have to understand WWII, or know about Nazi war crimes to see that they are clearly amoral killers in ROTLA. That Indy is against them kind of automatically casts him as the hero.

This is good indication of Indy's problematical nature.

Most people assume that the Germans in ROTLA are all Nazis, and therefore fair game, making Indy an automatic hero. The reality is not so black and white.

Toht was the only Nazi, and he was the one who displayed a passion for torture. All the others were just ordinary soldiers (forbidden from joining the NSDAP by their own command). That's not to say that they could not have been sympathetic to the Nazi cause, but all they were doing was following simple orders, guarding a dig site and its find, and not committing atrocities.

It was strange that Spielberg and Lucas didn't make Dietrich's unit SS, as they were the ones interested in religious artifacts, and all the hocus pocus myths of the Aryan race.

If Dietrich had been SS (and in the novelization he despises "the black suited clowns") Indy's actions would be less problematical. As it is, Indy is single-minded in his intent to prevent the Ark from falling into Hitler's hands, and anyone who stands in his way becomes fair game. To him, the end justifies the means. The greater horror of Hitler possessing so much power, or being emboldened by it, is worse than the deaths of a relatively low number of German soldiers.

I see the definition of a "hero" as a person who puts themself in danger to protect the life of another, whereas Indy often puts himself into danger driven by his own desire to claim the prize. That he saves people at the same time is a by-product of his initial intention.

I would define Indy as an "anti-hero".
 

Lance Quazar

Well-known member
Montana Smith said:
Toht was the only Nazi, and he was the one who displayed a passion for torture.

It is possible that the white suited agents who set up the attack on Indy in the marketplace and conspire with Monkey Man were Gestapo agents or SS.

It's possible...
 

Montana Smith

Active member
Lance Quazar said:
It is possible that the white suited agents who set up the attack on Indy in the marketplace and conspire with Monkey Man were Gestapo agents or SS.

It's possible...

I forgot about them, Lance. Though Toht is the only one who openly wears his Party badge, as proof of his allegiance.

I was thinking more of the soldiers, as they are habitually tagged as Nazis (even by Lucas and Spielberg, which again shows the naivity in the creation of ROTLA). In The Last Crusade the German soldier Indy's punching on the tank is wearing a Wehrmacht uniform, yet also wearing a Swastika arm band, again showing naivity or a lack of interest in history and accuracy. All of Vogel's soldiers are in Wehrmacht uniform, yet wearing the arm bands, though Vogel himself is SS (his cuff title is for the 'Leibstandarte Adolf Hitler' - the first SS regiment).

This really muddies the water when it comes to defining Indy's status, as the creators aren't even clear about the status of the Germans that Indy is killing.

Remember also that Germany had enforced military service, so some of Dietrich's unit could even be unwilling conscripts.
 

Morning Bell

New member
Ever since I was a child I've considered Indy to be a huge hero of mine. My parents let me watch the films as a kid and I never had any trouble differentiating the good guys from the villains. Granted, I was too young to understand some of the darker and more complex subtext of the films and of Indy's character but even now I still see him as a role model and hero. However, I do realize that the films contain some violent and creepy content that not all children will be able to handle or understand so I don't blame parents for being cautious. I think the franchise is pretty family friendly and most kids I know are familiar with the films to some extent.

I really love the fact Indy isn't one-dimensional and has an edgier side to him. He makes mistakes and often has to make a conscious choice to set his personal agenda aside for the greater good. We always know that Indy will save the day and do the right thing but watching how he does it and the decisions that he has to make really set him apart. Raiders and ToD are two great examples of where Indy starts out with somewhat selfish intentions and eventually sets those aside to achieve something greater.

Indy is a hero in my book but he does have a shadowy and darker side that make him relatable and more interesting than just a simple do-gooder, if that makes any sense.:)
 

monkey

Guest
Finn said:
monkey, I'm shocked. There is stuff in this post so disheartingly off I don't how to dress it properly... but I'll try.

So...
The revolver Indy used to shoot the swordsman was a .45 S&W Hand Ejector Model 2, not a .445 Webley Green, which he didn't use until Last Crusade.
<small>Geeks rejoice.</small>

I stand corrected. Thank you Finn.

Slightly smaller bullet, but same result.

Interesting points Montana, about the German soldiers being 'offed' by Indy. Some of them may have indeed been conscripts........much like many of the US soldiers killed in Viet Nam. Also interesting about the historical inaccuracy of the uniforms. I think that was a case of inattention to detail. "Raiders" was a great movie, but the wardrobe department was lacking in their attention to detail.

Anyway though this thread has become very interesting.

As for my own opinion: I think that of course Indiana Jones is a role model. I love the idea of kids digging in the backyard looking for archaeological treasures........and being interested in ancient Egypt and Mayan and Aztec cultures.......etc. etc.........jumping over chasms, finding secret doors.........and (ironically) getting away from the TV or game console, and actually playing outside and using their imagination.

My only fear is that Indiana Jones will be turned into a "childrens' character".

He is not.
 

HJJNR

New member
monkey said:
I stand corrected. Thank you Finn.

Slightly smaller bullet, but same result.

Interesting points Montana, about the German soldiers being 'offed' by Indy. Some of them may have indeed been conscripts........much like many of the US soldiers killed in Viet Nam. Also interesting about the historical inaccuracy of the uniforms. I think that was a case of inattention to detail. "Raiders" was a great movie, but the wardrobe department was lacking in their attention to detail.

Anyway though this thread has become very interesting.

As for my own opinion: I think that of course Indiana Jones is a role model. I love the idea of kids digging in the backyard looking for archaeological treasures........and being interested in ancient Egypt and Mayan and Aztec cultures.......etc. etc.........jumping over chasms, finding secret doors.........and (ironically) getting away from the TV or game console, and actually playing outside and using their imagination.

My only fear is that Indiana Jones will be turned into a "childrens' character".

He is not.

Thats exactly my point, my son and me are always out and about digging and searching and digging some more... he loves it and it gives me a chance to escape "being and adult" and revert back to getting my hands dirty and just having a blast.

I dont think you have anything to worry about as far as Indy being turned into a childrens character... he will only be a childrens character to the kids who watch it. (Does that make sense? it did in my head lol) :whip:
 

Indy's brother

New member
Montana Smith said:
Most people assume that the Germans in ROTLA are all Nazis, and therefore fair game, making Indy an automatic hero. The reality is not so black and white.

Since when is the world of Indiana Jones "reality"? Sure it's based in reality, but a reality which only serves as a starting point to tell a story. For the purposes of ROTLA and LC, there have to be protagonists and antagonists. The German soldiers were the right arm of the antagonists.

Montana Smith said:
all they were doing was following simple orders, guarding a dig site and its find, and not committing atrocities.

Oh come now. These films are not meant to show all the intricacies of human nature, or the moral dilemmas of german soldiers getting caught up in the hype of National Socialism thereby becoming pawns in Hitler's chess game of world domination. All that's needed is a basic understanding that these soldiers are being used as a weapon by the larger evil element of these stories. To postulate their individual plights when not a single one of these soldiers was painted in more than one dimension is to misunderstand their role in these tales. This is pulp fiction, not historical drama.

Montana Smith said:
It was strange that Spielberg and Lucas didn't make Dietrich's unit SS, as they were the ones interested in religious artifacts

For WWII buffs, yes, I agree with you. Of course in the eyes of a child, there is no difference.


Montana Smith said:
I see the definition of a "hero" as a person who puts themself in danger to protect the life of another, whereas Indy often puts himself into danger driven by his own desire to claim the prize. That he saves people at the same time is a by-product of his initial intention.

I would define Indy as an "anti-hero".

In the end, Indy always seems to redeem himself. ROTLA: "All I want is the girl", TOD: "Yes, now I see the power of the stones"..."It'd just be another rock in a museum collecting dust", in LC, he was actually questing for his father, and in KOTCS, his quest was to save Ox and Marion.

I like that he doesn't shot the guns out of nazi... er, German army regular's hands, and yes he has some character flaws. He's not flawed enough to walk one foot in the villain role and the other in the hero role (my understanding of "anti-hero") I think he is flawed enough to make him realistic, no more no less. I can see a valid argument for the anti-hero mantle, but I think that is an interpretation for the individual viewer to make, not necessarily a truth about his character. Maybe I'm old fashoined, simple, stubborn, or just still locked in the impression I got from indy when I was first introduced to him at the age of 10. He seemed like a full-fledged hero to me then, and didn't influence me to do anything amoral in his name since.
 
Top