NO Gun for Indy??? Is it official?

[tnswman]

Just to remind everyone, Indy lost his gun like ten minutes into ToD, and then spent the rest of the movie without it. It's not like there isn't a precedent.

that's not the point At least I don't think. I was jsut wondering if a Gun toting Indy ( As a part of his 1950's gear ) is possible in the age that the movie is in.

Now, I more see Indy doing his normal "stealing" of a Gun from the Russians. no matter if he has his pistol or not.

I bet that the Indy gear lovers will think a missing gun to be a big deal.

I just keep noticing how it is missing. It really does not change the character..what else do we have to talk about anyway? LOL!

 

[thebacklot]

On a film set the armorer, or sometimes the prop master holds the firearms unless they are needed in a scene. No one is allowed to walk around a set with a firearm unless cameras are rolling, everyone takes safety seriously. So far you've seen only ONE publicity shot that was between shooting for Comic-Con, and that could have merely been a mistake or the fact that the armorer was busy eating lunch while they did the satellite video feed and he forgot. I'm sure Indy will have his firearm, they're just very careful with it and all other weapons on set.

 

[scifiwolf]

The whole propmaster argument is bunk. He's only gonna hold the gun, not the holster, too.

The lack of the holster is the bigger issue if you guys wanna nitpick this. Indy may have barely used his gun, or even lost it, in previous movies, but he's never not had his holster.

 

[Finn]

The whole propmaster argument is bunk. He's only gonna hold the gun, not the holster, too.

You ever had a holster of that model on your hip? It's a big, stiff leather pouch and not exactly comfy. It hinders movement. Not much, but still enough to be a nuisance not to have it on while you don't have to.

We've had three off-set photos of Ford in gear. In the Spielberg snapshot from the first day, he's slumped in a chair. In that position, having a holster there could certainly be a hindrance. In the fresh Fresno candid shot, he doesn't have the whip or satchel either, only the basic clothing.

Only time we can question its non-presence is in the pic with Spielberg & the main cast. However, even then there're plenty of explanations for it so there's no need to arch a brow.

Of course, if Indy doesn't leave home being the cautious fellow he is in the movie itself (and we get no plausible explanation for that), it's going to be very odd, and in that light we can say that the gun is as important part of the gear as the hat and whip are. But there's absolutely no way to say according to what we've seen that he's not going to pack heat at all.

 

[tnswman]

The whole propmaster argument is bunk. He's only gonna hold the gun, not the holster, too.

The lack of the holster is the bigger issue if you guys wanna nitpick this. Indy may have barely used his gun, or even lost it, in previous movies, but he's never not had his holster.

This is the best statement regarding the fact! The Lack of the Holster in EVERY pic we have seen and I'm sorry but if you have not been looking at the Gossip mags, you have missed SEVERAL shots of Harrison in the gear ( eating ice cream, drinking coffee, on the cell phone, with a paper) and in several shots he has all the gear but the holster... the lack of a jacket does not matter because even when he has been without the jacket, he had the holster.

NOW, let's look to mystery of the Blues. Indy DOES NOT have the gun OR holster....In fact he exclaim's " THEY HAVE GUNS!" So, I think it is SAFE to say at this point that HISTORY shows that a 1950's Indy does not carry a gun

 

[ResidentAlien]

You ever had a holster of that model on your hip? It's a big, stiff leather pouch and not exactly comfy. It hinders movement. Not much, but still enough to be a nuisance not to have it on while you don't have to.

Again... what about the whip?

The whip is big, heavy and bulky. Trust me, I own a whip... not exactly the sort of thing I'd want strapped to my hip for any length of time...

 

[thebacklot]

I suppose some of you have never been on a set before, and clearly no one is going to change your mind, only time will tell.

 

[Finn]

The Lack of the Holster in EVERY pic we have seen and I'm sorry but if you have not been looking at the Gossip mags, you have missed SEVERAL shots of Harrison in the gear ( eating ice cream, drinking coffee, on the cell phone, with a paper) and in several shots he has all the gear but the holster...

I think it's been completely plausibly explained already why there's no holster in the off-set pics. Besides, if he has to hand the gun over once the camera's off, why wouldn't he hand away the holster at the same time? After all, wherever the prop master places it, it's also more neatly stored in its leather pouch...

The whip is big, heavy and bulky. Trust me, I own a whip... not exactly the sort of thing I'd want strapped to my hip for any length of time...

As far as I recall, Ford doesn't wear his whip much either in the off-set photos. (Recalling from memory, so that leaves me an option to be wrong.)

Anyway, isn't this discussion getting a little fruitless? We've given out our points, for and against, it's more and more coming to that who gets to have the last word. So let's grow up, shall we?

Anyway, to sum it all up...

1. Ford doesn't have a gun in the off-set photos, because:
a) The safety regulations prevent him from doing so.

Ford doesn't wear a holster in the off-set photos, because:
b) It's not a very comfy thing to carry around.
c) He hands it away along with the gun.

Ford doesn't have a gun or wear a holster in the off-set photos because:
d) Indy's going out armed with nothing but his whip & wits this time.

At the moment there's no evidence that would raise one of the options over the others.

 

[ResidentAlien]

I suppose some of you have never been on a set before, and clearly no one is going to change your mind, only time will tell.

Been on several, but thanks for condescending. It's kind of hard to you know... be a film student and not have been on a film set...

But we aren't talking about a set. We're talking about a promotional video. A video recorded to whet the appetite of the fans. I find it bunk to excuse the lack of a gun as "on-set politics." THIS IS NOT A SET.

 

[Finn]

But we aren't talking about a set. We're talking about a promotional video. A video recorded to whet the appetite of the fans. I find it bunk to excuse the lack of a gun as "on-set politics." THIS IS NOT A SET.

The opening post's referring to all the material we've seen this far, but concerning the Comic-Con video... guess you're right. It is a bit sloppy.

If all you tried to tell us is that it's weird he doesn't have it in this clip, well, I have to agree. If they wanted to give us Ford in full gear, they failed to do so.

But, there are still explanations to the lack of the holster other than he's not going to have it in the film at all. So we still have no definite answer...

 

[tnswman]

The opening post's referring to all the material we've seen this far, but concerning the Comic-Con video... guess you're right. It is a bit sloppy.

If all you tried to tell us is that it's weird he doesn't have it in this clip, well, I have to agree. If they wanted to give us Ford in full gear, they failed to do so.

But, there are still explanations to the lack of the holster other than he's not going to have it in the film at all. So we still have no definite answer...

Now we are rounding the corner LOL! I still say that the lack of the gun in the Mystery of the blues continues through the 50's for Indy.

 

[Blue Jay]

Only one belt!

another thing that bothered me was, that harrison was only wearing his belt to hold his trouser and the whip must have been attached to that.

I AM MISSING THE SECOND GUN BELT (for pistol and whip)

it is new that the whip is attached to his only belt.

NO one officially noted that...

but i am confident that everything will fall in place at time

 

[arkfinder]

Even if there's no pic.'s of him that doesn't mean he doesn't have one or gets one.

 

[otto rahn]

Well Indie's guns vary a bit from movie to movie (and even scene to scene). During the gunfight in the bar in "Raiders" he uses both a revolver (it looks like a "side swing cylinder" Colt or Smith and Wesson to me) and a small automatic (could be a Colt or a Browning, .32 or .380) and in "Last Crusade" the revolver that he uses in the tank chase is quite clearly a Webley (you can see the stirrup lock on the gun when he opens it) while at other times he uses captured German weapons (a Walther P38 is what it looks like). I somehow think that, given the dangerous places that he gets himself into, a gun would be just about mandatory for Indie !

 

[Michael24]

The bar shootout in RAIDERS always bugged my dad, with the guns changing, but I always assumed that the automatic was a back-up, perhaps in his bag, that he went for since there was no time to reload the revolver after he used that first.

 

[The Professor]

1. Ford doesn't have a gun in the off-set photos, because:
a) The safety regulations prevent him from doing so.

Ford doesn't wear a holster in the off-set photos, because:
b) It's not a very comfy thing to carry around.
c) He hands it away along with the gun.

Ford doesn't have a gun or wear a holster in the off-set photos because:
d) Indy's going out armed with nothing but his whip & wits this time.

At the moment there's no evidence that would raise one of the options over the others.

And, that's the same reason we haven't seen him with a jacket. It's awfully hot on set. Why wear it all the time? Plus, he might not wear it throughout the entire movie. The same thing with the gun.

 

[ResidentAlien]

And, that's the same reason we haven't seen him with a jacket. It's awfully hot on set. Why wear it all the time? Plus, he might not wear it throughout the entire movie. The same thing with the gun.

Again, I do not buy the comfort angle. Harrison's wearing a whip in the comic-con video! A whip is NOT comfortable to have strapped to one's hip. They're big, bulky and uncomfortable...

 

[The Professor]

Again, I do not buy the comfort angle. Harrison's wearing a whip in the comic-con video! A whip is NOT comfortable to have strapped to one's hip. They're big, bulky and uncomfortable...

Well, you might be right. Spielberg is wary of guns in his movies that are targeted to a younger audience. But, I still think he'll have one at one point (and perhaps lose it later). Indy is a "careful guy" after all (at least he was twenty-six years ago).

 

[ResidentAlien]

Well, you might be right. Spielberg is wary of guns in his movies that are targeted to a younger audience. But, I still think he'll have one at one point (and perhaps lose it later). Indy is a "careful guy" after all (at least he was twenty-six years ago).

Yes, and I do very much hope you're right...

 

[tnswman]

Yes, and I do very much hope you're right...

GUYS and GALS You are missing the point.. .Indy has already appeared in the 1950's WITHOUT the Gun....In The Mystery of the BLUES...It's clear as day..( even on the youtube video ) However, that did NOT keep him from using a gun at the end.

So, I think this is just part of Indy in the 50's He will use one I'm sure but he won't wear one.

I'm about ready to put money on it because NOTHING we have seen shows the holster and we have seen enough Promo stuff to be able to tell if you ask me (SDCC book and video)