"'Indiana Jones' Defended" Topic

…When Jones first sees Marion in her bar, they discuss the falling out he had with her father after they engaged in some kind of romantic relationship. Marion is holding a grudge, and shouts at Jones, "I was a child!"…

link

Oh, that is so stupid. She could have been 17 or 18 or 19 or even 21 and still claim to be a "child"— it's a metaphorical cry, a defense coming out of woundedness, which later appears to be possibly even unjustified. For all we know, she threw herself at a socially-awkward young archeology grad student (maybe even writing "love you" on her eyelids), who wised up and ran for the literal hills before things went full-bore Lolita. In the end, it's so open to interpretation as to be meaningless. Hollywood is stupid, but the Hollywood press is even more stupid.

Hollywood enabled and celebrated Harvey Weinstein, Woody Allen, Roman Polanski, Bill Cosby, and Hugh Hefner but are worried about a fictional character who in four movies has one line that might be questionable?

How ridiculous.

Mike Bunkermeister Creek
Bunker Talk blog

she still is (was) a child!

Note that Woody Allen has not been convicted of anything; reasonable people can disagree over his situation.

Hugh Hefner certainly exploited women, but not in a criminal sense as far as is known.

State of mind not age on her driver's license.

I have always thought that she meant "naive".

I figured she was a young adult and that he was a more wordly man.

I'm so glad to see this settled, because it makes a huge difference in how I paint my "adventurer with hat and bullwhip" figure, not to mention suitable scenarios.

No one else out there plays games with his miniatures?

I always presumed that she meant it literally and he hit on her when she was a teen.

Han shot first too.

Rogues can actually be rogues and not idealised role models.

I do not look to the penal code as my judge of morality.

There are things that are legal that are immoral.

There are things that are illegal that are moral.

Mike Bunkermeister Creek
Bunker Talk blog

Article says it's an issued debated by fans for over 40 years. I'm a fan and this is the first I've heard of it much less thought about.

The Woke movement won't stop until they have destroyed every possible iconic hero.

kinda hard to put her in Temple of Doom because it was set before Lost Ark chronologically

Oh and Han shot 1st and I don't lose sleep over it

Some folk just like "to suck the joy out of everything".

Karen Allen was 30* and Harrison Ford was 39 when they appeared in Raiders. The story is set in 1936. Assuming a standard career path to receiving a doctorate, Henry Jones, Jr., would have started college at 18 or 19, graduated at 21 or 22, been a Masters student for 2 years and a doctoral candidate for at least another 2, making him anywhere from 22-30 during the time period he would likely have associated with Abner Ravenwood (Master's degree to Doctorate to professorial candidate). This places his likely period of contact with Marian from when she was 13 to 21. Since he obviously completed his doctorate before splitting from his mentor (else he would have been dumped and likely blackballed), it's highly unlikely that the relationship with Marian began before she was 17. Thus, the character is (at the low end) 16, and at the high end 18 or even 19, if we assume Henry Jones, Jr., worked for his mentor for a few years after his doctorate (a likely assumption). At 30, Marian would indeed have seen her younger self as "a child." But this relationship would have been circa 1922-1925. At that time (and the bulk of human history leading up to it) a young woman of 15 or older was legally able to marry, and a 9 or 10 year difference to an older male suitor was not considered improper, or all that unusual. In some American regions, even age 13 was a legal and socially acceptable age for marriage, such laws lasting into the 1980s! So societally and legally, Marian was old enough and Indy young enough for the relationship to be acceptable, though understandably awkward and borderline scandalous (especially if Dad/Mentor doesn't know). So both were right— she probably was "a child" in her view, but she very well did "know what she was doing" in his view. The story never indicates how far the relationship went— far enough to leave them both wounded, and her angry, but not far enough to spark a lasting division— there's no hate in Marian and little sense of guilt in either her or Indy. So in the end the charge against Indy is flimsy at best, and silly at worst— they're both fictional characters and can have whatever background the viewer wishes to imagine— and their ages are fluid, too. Even the 9 year difference based on the actors' ages could be assumed to be even closer. If the script had said "we're only five years apart," audiences would have accepted it without question, and the whole "controversy" would be moot. But the script leaves it hanging, the point simply being "she was his mentor/father-figure's daughter and things got a little heavy, for which neither was prepared"— and the audience just nods— "Ah, they have a history"— and goes on with the show.

*(The actress's actual age obviously counts in this somewhat but her opinion does not— she's been cast to fulfill the role, and is clearly meant to look her actual age or close to it; a "woman of the world," not an ingenue. But what age she may think the background is meant to be is her own speculation— important for her performance, but irrelevant to the script. The role is conceived by the author, not the actress.)