Some say "Indy can't/shouldn't" exist in the 50s.
Why not?
I agree that Indy shouldn't exist anywhere past 1965, but...Anywhere from 1950-1962 (ideally no further than 1960 on the head), IMO is as far from our modern age as 1936 was from 1981. I mean, think about it from a 2015 perspective. Does not the '50s seem like a really quaint, almost antiquated period compared to our own - much the same way the 1930s must've seemed quaint and idyllic when compared to the crappy late 70s period in which Indy was first created?
I mean, if we got a next film with Harrison set in say, 1960, we're still in the Eisenhower years. We're still a world away from hippies and psychedelia. Go watch the first season of Mad Men sometime - that first season is set in 1960 - there was very little difference between the late '50s (which we've already covered in KOTCS) and 1963. I would keep it out of the Kennedy era because that's an era all it's own, but still...
The world was still a small enough place, IMO, in 1959 or 1960, for Indiana Jones to exist in. Men still wore hats - older men, like Doctor Jones would be - but they were still prevalent enough not to be seen as archaic (Heck, even in 1973's The Exorcist, the detective, who is not shown as an out of touch oldie but as a badass old man, has a very Indy-esque fedora). Young people generally still wore formal clothes as everyday wear in the late 50s and early 60s; you wouldn't see an Indy film set in 1959 or 1960 or 1961 where Indy is wearing his suit and fedora with kids in t-shirts and jeans walking around.
This time period - '58 to '63 - is an age where Cary Grant was one of Hollywood's leading men. Go watch films of the period; it's still a classy, grand, quaint world where Indiana Jones would still fit. Look how many fedoras were on heads at the 1960 opening day pitch, and how many men were still wearing suit and tie to an event as casual as a ball game then:
http://images.onset.freedom.com/ocregister/ntlk1e-b88494332z.120150824101508000grgbjha1.10.jpg
Why not?
I agree that Indy shouldn't exist anywhere past 1965, but...Anywhere from 1950-1962 (ideally no further than 1960 on the head), IMO is as far from our modern age as 1936 was from 1981. I mean, think about it from a 2015 perspective. Does not the '50s seem like a really quaint, almost antiquated period compared to our own - much the same way the 1930s must've seemed quaint and idyllic when compared to the crappy late 70s period in which Indy was first created?
I mean, if we got a next film with Harrison set in say, 1960, we're still in the Eisenhower years. We're still a world away from hippies and psychedelia. Go watch the first season of Mad Men sometime - that first season is set in 1960 - there was very little difference between the late '50s (which we've already covered in KOTCS) and 1963. I would keep it out of the Kennedy era because that's an era all it's own, but still...
The world was still a small enough place, IMO, in 1959 or 1960, for Indiana Jones to exist in. Men still wore hats - older men, like Doctor Jones would be - but they were still prevalent enough not to be seen as archaic (Heck, even in 1973's The Exorcist, the detective, who is not shown as an out of touch oldie but as a badass old man, has a very Indy-esque fedora). Young people generally still wore formal clothes as everyday wear in the late 50s and early 60s; you wouldn't see an Indy film set in 1959 or 1960 or 1961 where Indy is wearing his suit and fedora with kids in t-shirts and jeans walking around.
This time period - '58 to '63 - is an age where Cary Grant was one of Hollywood's leading men. Go watch films of the period; it's still a classy, grand, quaint world where Indiana Jones would still fit. Look how many fedoras were on heads at the 1960 opening day pitch, and how many men were still wearing suit and tie to an event as casual as a ball game then:
http://images.onset.freedom.com/ocregister/ntlk1e-b88494332z.120150824101508000grgbjha1.10.jpg
Last edited by a moderator: