Debate

Do to all the differant opinons over weather or not Indy should have a son I am opening this debate thread.Please post your thought's and opinon's on this subject here.If you are already in favor of Indy having a son and wish to descuss the this plot based on IF then please go to my other thread. Thank-you

Fan,

Many people have tried to organise the Indy fans and it has almost always failed i am afraid people will want to comment on the filled up thread rather than a thread in a backwater

no son

I am very against the idea of Indy having a son because first of all Indy is too independent, in last crusade his dad made sense because they could incorperate humor into the movie, but I don't see how they could make it that funny with a son while still staying true to the Indy spirit.

Indydude, Just because Indy has a son doesen't mean he will loose any of his serousness, I think alot of people are against Indy having a son because they think he will take over the Indy legacy,And I am so against that. His son should be a part of the Indy legacy, but Indy's realy the tree while a son would just be a branch, after all these are Indiana Jones films not the Son of Indiana Jones films. I am for him having a son. If you would like to know more about my thought's about the possibiltys of Indy having a son read through my other thread.

I agree with indydude

____________________________

"Were am i going to find another advasary so close to my level" - Belloq
"Try the local sewer" - Indy
____________________________

"Thats the second time i had to reclaim my property from you" - ?
"It belongs in a museum!" - Indy
"so do you" - ?

No kids. No son. No daughter.

We all know this will be the last Indy movie and I don't want it to turn into a son of Indy flick.

I want one last classic Indy adventure before the character rides out into the sunset for the last time.

Why is everyone so against Indy having a son? What is so bad about this,please tell me, let me in on the joke. Why are you all against this? I don't wan't his son taking over the legacy like some people do but I don't wan't there to be no son, I am sort of in the middle. Please I donnot get this, just tell me one thing, what would be the worst thing about Indy having a son in Indy IV. Besides I heard Harrison Ford said something about making a fifth movie so this may not be the last movie, so don't go counting your chicken's before they hatch.

Well, I, like a number of people around here, are looking for specific things in Indy IV, but I'm looking for a somewhat dark, noir-ish film in which Indy and his ways are obsolete. Marcus is dead, he probably had his job for awhile, but lost it for some incident on an expedition. So Indy is doing freelance archaeology work, like a private eye or something. He's become something of a drinker, he's lost his direction, he realizes there's really nothing for him anymore.

So, in my vision, there's just no reason for a son, if even the son's mother.

Okay,Attila the Professor, that's a beautiful idea for a movie,but I just don't think that it would work for Indy film. I think that we need to bring your vision up out of the gutter's,everyone one want's to have redemption in there work, but I just don't think that would work here. As far as the flaw's he is supposed to have I was thinking that since in the last movie he was ragging on his dad for always being more interested in his work then in him, that now the shoe's on the other foot he may be thinking how he could have missed something so obvious, perhap's even look at all the failed relationship's he was in and why they did'nt work.(You can read some of the other thing's I was thinking about a son subplot on my other thread) But I am sure we are all agreed that if Indy does have son in the new movie that the son does not take over the legacy.

You lost today, kid.....

Don't get us wrong, we love your passion. But there are so many accomplished film buffs and critics secretly using the Raven as a haven for anonymosity, that you good fill a beach on the south of Cannes with their towels.

The concept of Indy's son is not only a cheap trick to propel a plot, but it also diminishes the true nature of who Indy is.

One of the most important things you have to ask yourself, FAN, is are you a father? Now I know this seem simple, but go on, really ask yourself: what does being a father mean?In today's society being a father is a much forgotten concept. Even the noir of Indy addresses that fact. "Well what do you want to talk about?!" Indiana is a conscientious self made hero. If we look at his character realisticly, can we see such a man responsible for the life of another. COME ON. He can't even keep his women straight, or hold on to a single artifact.[just kidding]

On a more serious note; if you have even done any fiction (or non fiction) writing, you know that one of the most important aspects of writing is the concept of character. Things like motivation, personality, quirks, sentiment, history, love and a million of other words define a true character. Can you really see someone as careful and methodic as Indy not being aware of the nature of his....ahm, essence. Would Indy really be the type of person that A) would sleep with someone so uncaring as to not share the concept of pregnancy with him and B) allow himself the liberty of ignoring the consequences of ANY action. Hopefully, if you know Indy, you will say no.

I will go on to say (to the delight of Canyon and Ameera and countless others) tha I believe Indy is saving himself for the most appropriate time. Just because Marion fell in love doesn't mean they "did it." That is my opinion of course. I don't think anything is removed from his character if we see him as a virgin romancer.

Sorry for the digression.

FAN. You got heart, kid. But the concept of Indy's child, while sentimental, endearing and fluffy; would destroy an already complcated and complete character. We are not developing a sense of humor, you're not going deaf. It is just a weak idea and everyone in charge will ensure that it won't happen. I hope what I have said will be enough for you to understand, or that it will inspire someone to expand the idea to the point that you will be able to.

Now just a darn minute.

The concept of Indy having a kid is not a seed for which a horrible movie will grow. Nor is it a "cheap trick to propel a plot". I think it could work considering last crusade had Indy and his father exchanging reminiscences on life. If this discussion took place BEFORE last crusade, and someone asked if Indy's Dad should be in the movie, I'm sure it would be met with the same controversy. Anyone who disagree's with that is just being argumentative.

There are always reasons why Indy never knew he had son. He moved, gave no forwarding address. Marion never got her phone calls and letters returned so she figures he blew her off. Done. Explained.

However, I am playing devil's advocate a little as I do not want to see a Son of Indy movie for this reason only: I don't want no kid takin' up Harrison's spotlite. I don't want to watch some Kid play Indy while I'm looking at my watch waiting for the next 'Indy' scene.

I'm just saying it could work though...

Thank-you thegreatimposter,
Finally someone who see's my point of view here. Like
you said Indy having a son would work well for a storyline,
and like you I don't wan't to see the Son of Indy, in which his son takes over the legacy, (go to my other thread to see what poosibilities and advantages I have exsplored there with this) and thank-you for pointing out what I am trying to say to the other's. Oh and as to applehorse I think it make's plenty of sense for Marion not to tell Indy, especialy after he wen't out chasing other women after Raider's of the Lost Ark. Secondly you realy don't have room to talk since you have been self propeling what you think about Indy and Indy IV on a number of things, by your arguemnt I could just as easily say that Indy not having a son would deminsih his character and be a cheap trick to take a son out of the film. And you all still have to tell me what the worst thing about Indy having a son would be and why it's so terrible.

Point Taken

Okay, FAN, you're right, I didn't give an argument, just what I want for Indy IV.

Greatimposter, you bring up that we would think the same thing about Indy's dad being in Indy III. However, I disagree, because you don't often see the older generation of the reappearing hero, but the next generation is considerably more common. Hence, it is an obvious plot "twist", and no matter how it's handled, it will seem somewhat contrived. After all, aren't many of us already expecting a son (or daughter) in Indy IV?

I've mentioned this before, but Marion Ravenwood isn't all that popular, even among the fans. The layperson isn't going to remember who she is. I'll anticipate the argument that I want Marcus to be referred to, but he is the essential mentor character, and people will get the point easily. Even in RotLA and LC there really wasn't any character exposition for him, but there was a good deal of it for Marion, the old girlfriend/daughter of his original mentor that he had a fling with causing a falling-out with said original mentor and later went on another adventure with and then broke off the relationship with, which incidentally lasted long enough for said girlfriend to become pregnant with hero's child. Furthermore, Karen Allen isn't really a star, and so bringing her back more than twenty years later to appear in what will probably be meant as another big blockbuster sequel is unlikely, and not the wisest move from the production company's perspective.

The gruff, aging hero needing to confront the younger generation...we've seen it before. But when's the last time he's had to confront changing times and the errors of his ways?









I'll answer that...the last time it was done well was 1992, with Eastwood's Unforgiven.

I just find that before Last Crusade, the Idea of Indy's father being in the film gave me kind of a rumpled brow feel. I didn't know what to expect, and when I informed the lesser informed, it was met with disapproval. The point is, it broke tradition and changed the character.

The same is true about a son. We can hum and haw about it but in truth, until we see the final product and how it woulds be executed we'll have our doubts. Just as we did with Last Crusade. Only when we see it work, actually watch the film expertly unfold and maintain the 50's radio serial feel, while Indy has a son, will we say, "Oh, that was pretty good. I loved that they put his son in the movie." Just like we did with his dad.

As far as the incongruities with <arion and communication and whatnot... Well, writers write in, and writers write out. I'm sure thats a hole that can be worked out easily. But your accuracy I have to admit, is impressive, Professor. And as always, you raise excellent points.

I just find that before Last Crusade, the Idea of Indy's father being in the film gave me kind of a rumpled brow feel. I didn't know what to expect, and when I informed the lesser informed, it was met with disapproval. The point is, it broke tradition and changed the character.

The same is true about a son. We can hum and haw about it but in truth, until we see the final product and how it woulds be executed we'll have our doubts. Just as we did with Last Crusade. Only when we see it work, actually watch the film expertly unfold and maintain the 50's radio serial feel, while Indy has a son, will we say, "Oh, that was pretty good. I loved that they put his son in the movie." Just like we did with his dad.

As far as the incongruities with Marion and communication and whatnot... Well, writers write in, and writers write out. I'm sure thats a hole that can be worked out easily. But your accuracy I have to admit, is impressive, Professor. And as always, you raise excellent points.

Why are you all so down on Marion? I always liked her over Willy, if you compare the two of them I saw Willy throw one punch threw the entire film where's Marion was more much more of an heroine and had a lot of action while at the same time was a romantic lover with Indy, a great combination I think. And if you crossed Marion's personality with Indy's and something independent and new we would get a great charcter! I think though that Indy should be the main character throughout the movie's,and forget the Jones Dynasty ( uggh, that doesent even sound right ) and still we should Indy should have a son. And a son could work, Don't knok it before you try it! I have an idea, instead of looking at all the problem's with Indy having a son, why don't you guy's try to think up story lines were Indy does have a son and were it's and asset rather then a curse, then see if you still think Indy having a son is such a bad idea.Just try it I am curoius about what you will come up with, and tell your friend's and other Ravener's to visit and post there thought's and opinions here about this subject.

What if instead of Indy having a son, they bring Shorty back. In Temple of Doom Indy was like a father to him, and now the two would be like partners. Shorty also wouldnt be very old so he would still be like a son to Indy.

Every son has a father, but not every man is a father.

The concept of Short Round can be brought in to show that yes, Indy could be father-figure-esque, but I see it more as a surrogate father, foster replacement. Because of his father leaving him for the world, and his mother leavig this world, I can't see Indy wanting to have a child of his own, for fear of turning into the man his father was. I believe he fears the pain it would bring on.

Indy has heart, and does have the ability to be a father figure in a young man's life, but I don't believe he has the desire to be a father any time soon. I have to concur that, in order to keep his character consistant, the whoel notion of a known-to-him legitimate child is not worth it. However, an unknown child, perhaps a darker version of himself (sort of a Belloq-reincarnate?) may pave the way for interesting character development. But who are we to judge?

Let's leave it up to the masters; they'll think of something.

(although I'd kill for a spot in this film.)

I have thought about Shorty,
And I have a question, why wasn't he in the Last Crusade?
If you brought back Shorty he also would be in his late 20's/early 30's, he was about 11 in Temple of Doom,and let's add about 15 year's on to that, he would be about 26,
because Temple of Doom took place around oh 1942 or so, I was thinking Indy's son would be a teenager. Mabye they could bring back Shorty as a member of the exspidition but have Indy having a son by Marion. And Indy probably didn't plan a son, it just happened and like I said Marion was probably so mad at him she just did'nt bother to tell him, and I was thinking more of illigitamate rather then legal.
If you go to my other thread grumpus you can read through alot of the thought'd I already have had on this subject.

Not to pry or sound rude or anything, FAN, but where do you get your dates?

Raiders took place in 1936
ToD took place in 1935
LC took place in 1938.

These are the dates in the films and the books and the scripts. Histrical accuracy may be percieved to suffer, but it is only a movie.