Shia: Miscast?

Raiders90

Well-known member
Does anyone else feel Shia might've been miscast? I kind of feel he comes off as a bit of a goofball, and isn't nearly tough enough for the role (50's greaser) or as Indy's son. You could say, well, he was raised by Marion. Yeah, but Marion was a tough mother herself. And for the role of '50s greaser, he doesn't have any of the pathos or smarmy-ness which Marlon Brando conveyed in the Wild One--the most obvious influence on Mutt's character. He's not a juvenile deliquent, which is what many Greasers were portrayed as. He wields a switchblade, sure, but with "Even Stevens" Shia in the role, does anyone really think he'd use it? Perhaps I'm biased as my first exposure to him was on the aforementioned Disney show--so he always comes off a little too "family friendly" to me, especially for the role and who he's the son of.

I just think he was cast, not because he deserved the role or fit it, but because to Spielberg's affection for him, and also because at the time he was the flavor of the month--an obvious draw for younger, particularly female, viewers--Which are the wrong reasons to cast anyone in a role. A person should be cast in a role due to his/her ability to fit the part, not out of nepotism or because they're hot at the moment.

Also, a little off topic, but while the Greaser idea is pretty ool, it kind limits the Mutt character to a very brief period of history--the late 50s-mid 60s. Yes, there were Greasers after 1963 or 1964, but I'm talking about popular memory of them--They start to look out of place in popular history by around 1964 or so.

Indy, for example, doesn't really look anachronistic in the late '50s as men post WWII were wearing leather bomber jackets given most men alive had experienced WWII in some way, and many men were still wearing fedoras then. Now, if the film was set in 1967, he'd probably look out of place, but as such, his kind of look had a great deal of longevity. A long shelf life, if you will.

Greasers on the other hand became sort of out of place by the late '60s, many of them evolving into the '60s gruff and tough longhaired and bearded biker gangs. Sure, there was a small subculture which still dressed like they did in the '50s--And there was a nostalgia for that period in the mid-late '70s, but even so, the Greaser in pop culture is mostly a 50s-mid 60s thing. It kind of limits the potential for a spin off series, if that idea is ever resurrected. to span many years like Indy has.
 

Montana Smith

Active member
Raiders112390 said:
Does anyone else feel Shia might've been miscast?

Yes.

Raiders112390 said:
I kind of feel he comes off as a bit of a goofball, and isn't nearly tough enough for the role (50's greaser) or as Indy's son.

He came off as a fake. A sham-greaser. Certainly not a worthy successor for the fabled fedora.

Raiders112390 said:
You could say, well, he was raised by Marion. Yeah, but Marion was a tough mother herself.

I would have imagined him more like John Connor, son of Sarah Connor (T2 and Chronicles). That is, more streetwise, and less of a limp-looking dork.

Raiders112390 said:
And for the role of '50s greaser, he doesn't have any of the pathos or smarmy-ness which Marlon Brando conveyed in the Wild One--the most obvious influence on Mutt's character. He's not a juvenile deliquent, which is what many Greasers were portrayed as. He wields a switchblade, sure, but with "Even Stevens" Shia in the role, does anyone really think he'd use it?

It would have been better if Mutt was a really tough, uncontrollable character who had totally refused conformity and education. Not just a college drop-out who'd done well on the fencing team.

To me Mutt signifies the new era of a more respectable Indiana Jones. The son is even teaching his father that grave-robbing is not the done thing.

If this is how the beards see the future - and 19 years was a long time for the bearded visionaries to change their view of Indy - I don't want to see where they expect to take it next. Indy all married and domesticated, being taught rights and wrongs by a self-confessed delinquent. Indy V would have Disney stamped all over it, with Shia the Disney-kid taking a more leading role.
 

Mickiana

Well-known member
Yeah, Spielberg likes Shia. It's sad if that's all it takes. Shia wasn't ready for the role and I don't think he ever would be.
 

Dr Bones

New member
I agree with the above points, but then SPF's young Indy came across in a similar way to me. He lacked the usual Indy edge because of his youth and inexperience as a character, (not as an actor).

Mutt isn't Indy, never will be. Shia played the role OK imo, he doesn't come over too tough or streetwise, but neither did young Indy. They were both flawed, often out of their depth and those flaws can make for a more interesting well rounded older Indy/Mutt.

I still think the name Mutt is dumb and obvious.

Mickiana said:
Yeah, Spielberg likes Shia. It's sad if that's all it takes. Shia wasn't ready for the role and I don't think he ever would be.

He was Ok as Mutt, but never Indy.

Montana Smith said:
Yes.

If this is how the beards see the future - and 19 years was a long time for the bearded visionaries to change their view of Indy - I don't want to see where they expect to take it next. Indy all married and domesticated, being taught rights and wrongs by a self-confessed delinquent. Indy V would have Disney stamped all over it, with Shia the Disney-kid taking a more leading role.

That seems to be the way Star wars is going, all softening the un pc edges of the old and cartooning/CGi the new. Yuk.

The youth obsessed culture is dictating everything is aimed at those with goldfish attention spans and too much pocket money, than those who care.
 
Last edited:

Darth Vile

New member
Marlon Brando in The Wild One was more an influence on the aesthetic/look and not the personality of Mutt per se. I think the point was that Mutt was pretending to be much tougher than he actually was. It wasn't until he was "in the field" that he realised the "old professor" he was travelling with was much more experienced and tougher than he was... "You're a teacher?"...
 

Wilhelm

Member
That's right. Mutt has 2 sides like Indy: greaser and nerd. We see him in the photo with Ox and in the ending with his "academic" look. But he pretends to be a greaser, a tough guy like Brando but his true identity is seen in the cemetery where he's afraid of everything.

It's the same as Indy: Henry Jones Jr, the academic who is shy and afraid of his female students, and the Indiana Jones side. The snakes is the key element, the Achiles heel, that reveals his true identity.

Spielberg used this type of dual personalities in his short "Amblin" where we see a young boy who is also a faux hippie.
 

Udvarnoky

Well-known member
I don't think Shia was miscast so much as the character was. I don't get the impression that anyone involved actually sat down and came up with a good reason why Indy needed a son other than the fact that it was the next logical (read: predictable) extension of a construct used already in Last Crusade. I'm not saying there isn't an excellent way to exploit the concept, I'm saying they didn't find it, or they didn't have enough faith in it to give it the focus it needed. Koepp's script is laden with the bloodstains of like four excellent potential Indy stories. Somebody should have picked an idea and ran with it, instead of taking a bunch of undeveloped ideas, tossing it into a pot, and calling it soup.
 

Darth Vile

New member
Udvarnoky said:
I don't think Shia was miscast so much as the character was. I don't get the impression that anyone involved actually sat down and came up with a good reason why Indy needed a son other than the fact that it was the next logical (read: predictable) extension of a construct used already in Last Crusade. I'm not saying there isn't an excellent way to exploit the concept, I'm saying they didn't find it, or they didn't have enough faith in it to give it the focus it needed. Koepp's script is laden with the bloodstains of like four excellent potential Indy stories. Somebody should have picked an idea and ran with it, instead of taking a bunch of undeveloped ideas, tossing it into a pot, and calling it soup.

I agree that they didn't manage to pull any extra drama out of the long lost son premise. An additional couple of scenes would have done the trick I think... 1) Some quiet 2 minute scene between Indy and Mutt coming to terms with their new relationship (which we never got). 2) Some final resolve which would set the scene for their future relationship. Just something that would have raised the stakes slightly in the final quarter and made the finale a tad more personal/interesting (a la TLC) rather than the more generic denouement it is.

I like the wedding scene at the end, but given that the story is supposed to (or should) centre around Indy & Mutt, the coda would have worked better with Indy/Mutt doing some father & son thing rather than Indy/Marion.
 

Indy1Jones2

New member
They Should Have Done Their Relationship Like Indy And Henry. That's What I Thought It Was Going To Be Like That With The School Chase. It Kinda Reminded Me Of The Bike Chase In Crusade Sort Of.
 

kongisking

Active member
Darth Vile said:
Marlon Brando in The Wild One was more an influence on the aesthetic/look and not the personality of Mutt per se. I think the point was that Mutt was pretending to be much tougher than he actually was. It wasn't until he was "in the field" that he realised the "old professor" he was travelling with was much more experienced and tougher than he was... "You're a teacher?"...

Thank you. I interpreted his attitude the exact same way. I'm positive he was meant to come across as a kid desperately trying to look badass, but was failing horribly, until the duel with Spalko forced him to become a badass to survive. I love when that sort of thing happens in stories: when otherwise-unextraordinary people have to become extraordinary to make it out alive. Samwise Gamgee is the definition of this trope.

Want proof that this is what the filmmakers had in mind? See this featurette, and listen to how Shia describes Mutt around 3:43:

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/w06fE182s5s" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 

Indy's brother

New member
Montana Smith said:
To me Mutt signifies the new era of a more respectable Indiana Jones. The son is even teaching his father that grave-robbing is not the done thing.

Tell me about it.
*GAG*
At the theater I had a "what the hell?" moment on this one. It kind of flies in the face of the Indy I know. If Indy can't just walk off with relics, then why did he try to snag the fertility idol, or the sankara stones? What because they weren't from graves? Oh, that's why.....because of Indy's respect for the dead, like when he ripped the arm off of a skeleton to use as a torch under the library in LC.
:rolleyes:
The dagger bit in KOTCS was a watered-down moment that empowered the upstart Mutt, and neutered Indy a bit. I think that moment was supposed to be some kind of bonding thing built on humor, but it certainly didn't work for me.
 

Montana Smith

Active member
Indy's brother said:
Tell me about it.
*GAG*
At the theater I had a "what the hell?" moment on this one. It kind of flies in the face of the Indy I know. If Indy can't just walk off with relics, then why did he try to snag the fertility idol, or the sankara stones? What because they weren't from graves? Oh, that's why.....because of Indy's respect for the dead, like when he ripped the arm off of a skeleton to use as a torch under the library in LC.
:rolleyes:
The dagger bit in KOTCS was a watered-down moment that empowered the upstart Mutt, and neutered Indy a bit. I think that moment was supposed to be some kind of bonding thing built on humor, but it certainly didn't work for me.

hi51.gif


It was yet another emasculation of poor Indy in KOTCS. This is the movie that throws everything at the man: age; kidnap; McCarthy backlash and resulting banishment from his place of work; blackmail; double-cross; an atom bomb; three waterfalls; subjected to the control of the skull; marriage; and finally, that upstart son! (Who also happened to be played by Shia, whom I don't really rate as as a top-class actor - he's no River Phoenix).
 

Mickiana

Well-known member
Montana, you so aptly listed those factors in Indy's emasculation that I found the movie even more depressing. Where's an emoticon with tears?
 

Hanselation

New member
kongisking said:
..

Want proof that this is what the filmmakers had in mind? See this featurette, and listen to how Shia describes Mutt around 3:43:

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/w06fE182s5s" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

(Does anyone else feel Shia might've been miscast?)
Indeed! He doesn't really fit into that character - but also the character of Mutt wasn't written very well. :eek: Watching some scenes with Shia/Mutt, I think it could have been done much better, obviously.

And I think, if Indy would have a daughter, as it was foreseen first (like George Lucas tells in the featurette ~2:30 (y) ) there could have be much more potential for a fascinating relationship - and not the low storytelling quality of the repeating what we've already seen much better in LC: A father who is confused of his son's attitude. :sleep:

Monkey business!

But at the end I like it that we have Indiana Jones 4, because finally it's Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones walking through an adventure.
 

Darth Vile

New member
There has always been a big discrepancy in the Indiana Jones movies of a seasoned academic/professor who will quite happily go looting archaeological treasure troves rather than actively taking part in the science of his profession... but that's movies for you. I think that the particular moment in Orellana's tomb (with the knives) is just used to convey how a respected academic can easily fall back into his old ways (one assumes that in the intervening years Indy has become more respectable?), and obviously it is a play on the personalities i.e. the teacher is a would-be thief and the biker with the blade is the honest one. Whilst the actual joke is nothing more than average, it certainly doesn't rob Indy of his masculinity...
 

Indy's brother

New member
Darth Vile said:
obviously it is a play on the personalities i.e. the teacher is a would-be thief and the biker with the blade is the honest one. Whilst the actual joke is nothing more than average, it certainly doesn't rob Indy of his masculinity...

Well sure, I get all of that. But Indy succumbing to the will of some punk greaser after saving his life, to boot? That's too much. It would've worked better if Indy said Oh, yeah, sure kid" and then stowed it away as soon as Mutt's back turned. Then later he could have cut himself loose with it instead of that lame bit with the switchblade.

I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you about the emasculatory quality of the daggar bit. However unintentional it was, the scene certainly fits the bill to me. It's a weapon, for starts. And a phallic one at that. Then Mutt insists that he can't have it, and must rely on the young man's for the rest of their journey together. Sorry if my Freudian take on this is making anyone squirm, but it also can serve as a metaphor for how the rest of the film plays out, depending on who you ask around here. Also, the unapologetic Indy of the previous 3 films acting sheepish and guilty towards:

1. a pushy teen
2. who is in no way an archaeologist/peer
3. but owes Indy his life
4. not to mention the whole trip is a favor to Mutt.

Indy de-balled by an insecure kid. Sheesh.

Back on point, though. None of this particular exchange is on Shia. It was written that way, and no casting could have changed that
 

Montana Smith

Active member
Indy's brother said:
Well sure, I get all of that. But Indy succumbing to the will of some punk greaser after saving his life, to boot? That's too much. It would've worked better if Indy said Oh, yeah, sure kid" and then stowed it away as soon as Mutt's back turned. Then later he could have cut himself loose with it instead of that lame bit with the switchblade.

I like that idea. That would be like making Han shoot first again. Indy the sneaky opportunist, the old dog who doesn't like being beaten by a kid. And when he did cut himself loose with the stolen dagger, he'd give one of those quirky Harrison Ford 'what's your problem?' looks.

Indy's brother said:
Back on point, though. None of this particular exchange is on Shia. It was written that way, and no casting could have changed that

In that regard I do think there is something to say about different actors bringing more to, or extracting more from a script. While the writing of KOTCS will always hamper certain characters, another actor might have lessened the impact.
 

Darth Vile

New member
Indy's brother said:
Well sure, I get all of that. But Indy succumbing to the will of some punk greaser after saving his life, to boot? That's too much. It would've worked better if Indy said Oh, yeah, sure kid" and then stowed it away as soon as Mutt's back turned. Then later he could have cut himself loose with it instead of that lame bit with the switchblade.

I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you about the emasculatory quality of the daggar bit. However unintentional it was, the scene certainly fits the bill to me. It's a weapon, for starts. And a phallic one at that. Then Mutt insists that he can't have it, and must rely on the young man's for the rest of their journey together. Sorry if my Freudian take on this is making anyone squirm, but it also can serve as a metaphor for how the rest of the film plays out, depending on who you ask around here. Also, the unapologetic Indy of the previous 3 films acting sheepish and guilty towards:

1. a pushy teen
2. who is in no way an archaeologist/peer
3. but owes Indy his life
4. not to mention the whole trip is a favor to Mutt.

Indy de-balled by an insecure kid. Sheesh.

Back on point, though. None of this particular exchange is on Shia. It was written that way, and no casting could have changed that

I actually agree with your Freudian take on that particular moment, but just disagree with the interpretation of it. If anything, Indy is saying "mine is always gonna be bigger than yours kid".

IMHO - Indy ain't succumbing to the will of a teenager; Mutt is simply playing the role (in this instance) of a moral conscience... for a quick visual gag. I'm not saying it's great, because I think the joke is actually underplayed, a tad clumsy and thus largely redundant... however, believing the scene to act as an emasculation mechanism is over egging it, as I firmly believe that by this stage of the proceedings, the movie is working to reenforce Indy's status as 'the hero'. Through Mutt's eyes, which can be seen as the eyes of the audience, Indiana Jones has transformed from tenured professor to hardened adventurer. Indy, even in Mutt's eyes, is now in charge.

Re. Shia as an actor. He seems to be an actor one either likes or dislikes. When he was announced as being in the movie, I thought he'd be good... but I knew he'd never be viewed as a serious hard man/action hero type... as he just doesn't have the quality (both physically and in his acting style). I think the issue here is more that in some eyes, he's not the character they perceived he would be. The only real issue for me is that they never developed the father/son relationship post reveal i.e. nothing substantial changes with the dynamic. It terms of emotion, the anti is not upped for Indy (which I believe there was the opportunity to do).
 
Last edited:

kongisking

Active member
Hanselation said:
And I think, if Indy would have a daughter, as it was foreseen first (like George Lucas tells in the featurette ~2:30 (y) ) there could have be much more potential for a fascinating relationship - and not the low storytelling quality of the repeating what we've already seen much better in LC: A father who is confused of his son's attitude. :sleep:

Monkey business!

But at the end I like it that we have Indiana Jones 4, because finally it's Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones walking through an adventure.

Agreed. But I still liked Mutt, mostly because he automatically gets cool points just for being related to Indy. That said, I would have preffered a daughter. For just this one time, I will say it: Damn you, Spielberg (for rejecting that idea).
 
Top