3 ms·
You’re not watching Harrison Ford, you’re watching Indiana Jones in a purer form than today’s Harrison Ford is able to play him. In a universe without digital t
by Joeri 3y ago
You’re not watching Harrison Ford, you’re watching Indiana Jones in a purer form than today’s Harrison Ford is able to play him. In a universe without digital trickery they would have recast the character and rebooted the series. For an actor being asked to be the face of a character for all time should be the high mark of their career, and what a way to honor them after they pass away.
- JohnFen 3y agoI'm watching Indiana Jones as interpreted by Harrison Ford. The actor's interpretation of the role is an important part. I'm less interested in some "purer form" of the character, because that's effectively a different character.
- 5555624 3y agoBut, for now, "Indiana Jones as interpreted by Harrison Ford" is Indiana Jones. His is really the only interpretation of Indiana Jones as an adult. By contrast, there are a handful of interpretations of James Bond. River Phoenix played Indiana Jones as a teen in the third film, while Sean Patrick Flanery played the teen Jones in the TV series/movies. (Corey Carrier played a younger version in some episodes.) Add a little of George Hall as a 90-year-old Indiana Jones; but, all he does is introduce the stories of the young Indiana Jones.
- JohnFen 3y agoAll of which I'd bring up to support my opinion, too! All of those are characters as interpreted through the actors. That interpretation is, in my opinion, a very important part of the art form. Without it, it's a different thing entirely.