Why does it have to be Commies?

I've seen many people suggesting that Indy will confront Communists in the next film, and my question is WHY?

Nazis made sense. It's a historical fact that Hitler had a strong interest in ancient artifacts and the occult. He did seek the Holy Grail and the Spear of Destiny, and he did tell his people that they were the descendents of Atlantians.

As far as I know, Stalin did not express any interest in hunting down ancient relics, nor was he particularly interested in the occult. Yes, I know the Indiana Jones movies are fictitious, but they have always been based on some sense of reality, so I expect Indy 4 to also take this into account.

What's more, the word "communist" does not stir the same level of emotion in most people as the word "Nazi." While many of us in the Western world don't agree with the communist ideaology or its practices, at least it isn't an ideaology based on blind hatred like Hitler's. And many people in Eastern European countries that have now abandoned communism are starting to wish for its return. I don't agree with them, but the fact that there's still large support for Communism by intelligent, civilized people ultimately makes it work less well in an Indy movie.

All things considered, I think using Communists would be a cheap way out for Lucas, and a feeble attempt to redo Raiders and Last Crusade, but with a less compelling enemy. Why does it have to be a political party at all? Indy is an archaeologist, not a politician or a government agent.

1. It doesn't have to be commies, but in the '50's the commies were the defining enemy and big heros need big enemies.

2. The communists' motivation may need to be different than the Nazis sure, but not by much. A good writer should have any trouble putting Indy at cross purposes to Stalin (who died in '53 or 'Krushchev who came after). Read a little Solzhenitsyn and you'll realize nothing was too trivial for communist intervention...nor did the intervention have to make much sense. Anything that might be a symbol of nationalism in any one of the dominated nations under the boot of the Soviets would be a threat. Don't want those Hungarians revolting.

Indy either has something or is pursuing something of great symbolic or supernatural significance. The communists aware of its power don't want that artifact falling into the hands of either the locals or the West. The postwar period was loaded with intrigue and a victory at all costs mentality. Patton in WWII new the Soviets would be the next enemy. So did Churchill who coined the phrase, "Iron Curtain."

You fellas do remember the Iron Curtain, don't you?

Broomhandle Davis said:

Anything that might be a symbol of nationalism in any one of the dominated nations under the boot of the Soviets would be a threat. Don't want those Hungarians revolting.

Indy either has something or is pursuing something of great symbolic or supernatural significance. The communists aware of its power don't want that artifact falling into the hands of either the locals or the West. The postwar period was loaded with intrigue and a victory at all costs mentality. Patton in WWII new the Soviets would be the next enemy. So did Churchill who coined the phrase, "Iron Curtain."

You fellas do remember the Iron Curtain, don't you?

Click to expand...

Iron Curtain? Never heard of it.

Okay, you do have some good ideas, and the scenario you present could work, but my main problem with using communists is still that it seems too much like an attempt to replace the Nazis. It wouldn't feel new, it would basically be the same villains in different uniforms and less hateful.

If Last Crusade didn't exist, I think a lot of us would be more open to different ideas. The fact that Last Crusade rehashed the Nazi idea makes us feel like Indy needs to be fighting a political group. Picture if we had only seen Raiders and Temple of Doom: a political party in one, a religious cult in the other. We'd be wracking our brains trying to figure out what's next.

The whole problem is that you've got a fish out of water.

Indiana Jones in the fifties.

We've got a fish out of water and we're trying to figure out how to keep it alive.

It will die. It is a fish out of water.

Indiana Jones is a 1930's action adventure hero.

Any sports fans here? Remember when Michael Jordan tried to play baseball?

I get it

The artifact will be the ancient Assyrian "Fish Out of Water" icon. Or was it Inuit?

Hey now, let's all try to be optimists. And yes, I know what the Iron Curtain is, but please enlighten me, for I do not know why it was named that; I can't remember from my modern world studies class last year....Also, it's the 50's, ok! Commies were considered "evil" back then. But who knows, may be Indy 4 should have some sort of religious cult type thing in it. Perhaps Indy 4 should be about Atlantis, but with instead of Nazis in it, we could have, umm, Italians! Or commies....

Kumba has a point, no one even considered the Nazis evil in the early thirties, but in contrast the Soviets were considered evil monsters. Isn't the Indy series based on stereotypes anyway?

And who's to say that all soviets were angels?

Stalin isn't exactly your friendly nieborhood role model either(well maybe for Saddam), but considering what he did to bring Russian up to modernization can't be called 'nice', but it was productive. Of course you can argue either way, but everyone will agree his nice exterior masked something we can call evil.

Stalin slaughtered more people than Hitler, no one seems to fathom that.

Anyway, it was a political war, and Marxism is not bad, it just gets a bad rep because of people like Stalin. But we could still use Soviets, couldn't we?

Oh yes, we live in a PC world, forgot about that.

Has Lucas not leaked any info on who the super villians will be in this movie?

Ah, but that is the secret...

Indy Smith said:

Has Lucas not leaked any info on who the super villians will be in this movie?

Click to expand...

Indiana Jones does not fight "super villains." The villains are not that extraordinary.

It is the predicaments that tend to be extraordinary.

swords said:

Kumba has a point, no one even considered the Nazis evil in the early thirties, but in contrast the Soviets were considered evil monsters. Isn't the Indy series based on stereotypes anyway?

And who's to say that all soviets were angels?

Stalin isn't exactly your friendly nieborhood role model either(well maybe for Saddam), but considering what he did to bring Russian up to modernization can't be called 'nice', but it was productive. Of course you can argue either way, but everyone will agree his nice exterior masked something we can call evil.

Stalin slaughtered more people than Hitler, no one seems to fathom that.

Anyway, it was a political war, and Marxism is not bad, it just gets a bad rep because of people like Stalin. But we could still use Soviets, couldn't we?

Oh yes, we live in a PC world, forgot about that.

Click to expand...

Staling slaughtered more people than Hitler? I mean, I've heard of Stalin's purges, but Hitler murdered 6 million Jews. If what you say is true, wow...

Kumba said:

Staling slaughtered more people than Hitler? I mean, I've heard of Stalin's purges, but Hitler murdered 6 million Jews. If what you say is true, wow... [/B]

Click to expand...

Slaughtered is a bit of an exageration. Stalin is generally estimated to been responsible for the deaths of 20 to 30 million Soviet citizens between 1928 and 1953. This was partially due to Stalin's purges, but also in part to mismanagement during the five year plans. Hitler by comparison had 12 million people killed in the death camps as well as another 12 to 14 million German war deaths (half of the population of Germany in 1938). If you want to go for sheer body count, Chairman Mao was responsible for the deaths of 40 million people, most of which occured during the Great Leap Forward, when Mao wanted to rapidly industrialize China, but there were still at least ten million Chinese killed while he consoludated power between 1942 and 1949.

Stalin

Stalin deliberately caused 19 million deaths by starvation in the Ukraine alone. Mismanagement? Ha, it was deliberate.

His deeds drove his wife to madness. Perhaps only Mao eclipsed his bloodthirsty ruthlessness.

Doesn't say much for Marxism. The full name for Nazis is National Socialists.

Nazional Socialism rose in Germany as a reaction to Communism. The first people Hitler had round up were the Communists.

On a side note, one of the best reasons not to use the Communists in Indy 4 is that Party doctrine disavows the existence of the supernatural (which didn't stop the Soviets from having the most advanced research in mental telepathy in the 1970s). Nazional Socialism was very much based in mythology and supernatural forces, and they openly and actively sought to secure various mystical objects and places.

Great thoughts everyone, but I think we kind of strayed from my original point (or maybe my original point wasn't clear.) I'm not saying Stalin wasn't a bad guy, I'm saying he wasn't obsessed with the occult and he wasn't devoting his time to searched for ancient relics (as far as I know.) Hitler actually did these things. He did hope to find the Holy Grail and The Spear of Destiny, so it makes sense that he could be racing against an archeaologist in an attempt to find these things. He also tried to convince his people that they were decendents of Atlantians, so even Fate of Atlantis was based on something.

Now, if in Indy 4 we suddenly see Stalin racing to get an ancient artifact in order to have power over the world, I really think it's going to seem a bit contrived and with a sense of deja vu. I guess all I'm saying is that it would be nice if Lucas could think of a new plot, not just another one in which a political party seeks world dominance by way of supernatural power. Temple of Doom had a slightly different story, so I think Indy 4 could as well, and yet could still "feel" like an Indy movie.

(edit: VALIS, I just read your comment about the communists attitude towards supernatural powers-- good observation, and that may factor into things. As I recall, this was even brought up in "Infernal Machine.")



[Edited by Randy_Flagg on 05-27-2003 at 06:50 am]

Who said the artifact ever had to be part of the occult?

Stalin would be extrememly unlikely to go after an artifact like the Grail even if it did exist, however if he thought he could get a use out of an artifact he may well do so, such as the Philosophers Stone for producing uranium. Or perhaps following up on some research captured after the fall of Hitler; really all the Nazis ever did in the Indy films was a the grunts for Indy to kill, the villians were of another country....

Well, as Monkey has pointed out more than once...

...it is difficult to take Indiana Jones out of the 'Thirties without losing something. If you put him in the '50's you really have to jettison the Nazis and political systems who take much stock in the occult.

Personally I'd used the Commies as a very dangerous backdrop as Indiana competes with some other group to retrieve some magical artifact. The fall of China to the Reds would be good. Manchuria during the Korea War would be excellent. One of the Chinese attackes on Tibet would be visually breath taking.

Make the villain a Donovan-esque characters who wishes to preserve his virility or something and seeks the powdered rhinosceros horn from the tomb with all the terracota soldiers.

Villains

Renderking Fisk said:

.. and no body would believe in a French villain these days...

Click to expand...

Which days? I'd think currently treacherous French villains would be very in.

Renderking Fisk said:

I would rather believe that Indy isn?t going to have to fight whole armies for an artifact, but make it more personal? his adversary is going to be a former student or colleague.

Click to expand...

Good idea... I like that better than the Communist thing.

And that emphasizes one of the points I was trying to get across from the beginning-- there are possibilities for enemies beyond the obvious "Evil Communist" answer, especially since I don't even think communists would make the greatest enemies.

If it has anything to do with Communism, maybe Indy should be going up against HUAC.

Broomhandle Davis said:

Personally I'd used the Commies as a very dangerous backdrop as Indiana competes with some other group to retrieve some magical artifact. The fall of China to the Reds would be good. Manchuria during the Korea War would be excellent. One of the Chinese attackes on Tibet would be visually breath taking.

Click to expand...

Interesting! Soviets are not the villians per say, but still pose a threat to Indy and his "adversaries". The Tibet idea sounds intriguing, there was a rumour that Indy 4 could be set in China, which borders Tibet if Im not mistakened.

Then these could be the communists...

[Edited by swords on 05-27-2003 at 10:29 pm]