-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Karen Allen on Indiana Jones' relationship with Marion: "I don’t think of him as a pedophile"
- Thread starter DiipuSurotu
- Start date
- Spoiler
It sorta kinda is, when you think about why Indy and Marion's father were estranged and why they weren't in the best of terms, themselves.
A while back I watched a popular Korean movie from 2004 called My Little Bride on Amazon Prime, and I kept wondering how Era would view this film. It's a love story between a 16-year-old girl and a college student. I don't remember if they ever say how old the guy is supposed to be, but the actors had a six-year age gap and it showed.
Asian has a lot movie/show about this.
On the topic.
I though something terible happen between indy and his mentor and he can't face her.
Last edited:
As a rule, personally, I'm in the camp of "if it's not explicitly spoken or factually laid out within the work itself then it might as well be fan-fiction," be it coming from the script's liner notes, the writers themselves, critics, the actors, the directors, otherwise I don't know where you could reliably draw the line between the objective work itself and subjective opinion (more on that later).
Indy himself being a morally gray/kinda shitty protagonist is absolutely nothing new in the context of the rest of the movie. Regarding this exchange in particular, "child" could absolutely be interpreted in the context of intellectual or social maturity as opposed to literal age and Indy being a literal pedophile, and no age for either of them is ever given. However, it certainly does not paint Indy as being in the right, whatever unfolded between the two of them, and he gets called out for his shitty attitude by Marion directly. And regardless, as for the audience's culpability, in general I think there's a big difference between appreciating/enjoying a film/piece of art and idolizing/condoning (either in part or as a whole) the creators, individual characters, or the moral stances taken by them.
All this being said, there's a lot of stuff swirling around about the "canon" in the context of this scene, so in the interest of getting the facts out there, whatever they might be, I decided to do some digging myself: *deep breath*
Raiders is set in 1936. While her age is never revealed in the dialogue or otherwise, the original screenplay as written by Kasdan (search "INT. "THE RAVEN" SALOON - PATAN, NEPAL - NIGHT") explicitly introduces Marion as 25 in the scene (thus born in 1911), and subtracting 10 years would make her 15 at their last meeting as described in their conversation. That being said I think there's also room to interpret the "10 years" as spoken as potentially being anywhere between 8-12 years seeing as 10 years is a commonly rounded time range. Regardless though, whether she was legally a minor under modern standards, she was definitely implied to be at best borderline when they presumably had their affair. However, NOWHERE in even the Raiders screenplay is Indy's age ever specifically mentioned, but based on the dialogue it's implied that he's at least several years older than she is and it's safe to assume he was past adulthood. It also does not mention anything specifically about what they did together, though again it's implied at least that there was significant emotional involvement on Marion's part. But that's the end of it in the script, and Raiders ends Kasdan's involvement in the series entirely.
In a similar fashion, Temple of Doom begins in 1935 but with no explicit mention of Indy's age either. Last Crusade opens on what's almost certainly a teenage Indy though the year of that sequence is never established, only that we rejoin Indy aboard the boat off the Portuguese coast in 1938. And just to be sure, checking the Crystal Skull screenplay (search "EXT TRAIN STATION DAY"), Mutt, who Marion says is Indy's son, is described as being 20 years old, and so based on the screenplay starting in Nevada, 1957, that places Mutt being born/conceived around 1936-1937, which is during/after the events of Raiders. Still no explicit mention of Indy's age.
Now if you wanna talk about the entirety of Indiana Jones media, The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles TV show does explicitly establish Indy as having been born on July 1, 1899, which would have made him around his mid twenties to Marion's mid-teens when they were last involved prior to Raiders. I think it's important to note though that this was a series produced by Lucas 8 years after the original movie and with zero credit to Spielberg who directed the original film series or Kasdan who wrote the original Raiders screenplay. This is especially key considering the last, though loosest, bit of metatext.
There is on the internet a supposed transcript of a Raiders story conference with Spielberg, Lucas, and Kasdan dated January 1978, 6 years prior to the film's release and nearly 2 years prior to the full screenplay drafted in December 1979. As to its legitimacy, the only mention I've found is in an interview with Kasdan, where it is proffered to Kasdan who acknowledges its existence though doesn't verify the entirety of its contents. With that in mind, on page 25 of this transcript, in opening discussion about the heretofore unnamed "girl", it's put forth by Kasdan, the eventual screenplay writer, that she and the heretofore unnamed protagonist should have a pre-existing romantic involvement. Lucas, as the original concept creator, is the one who posits making her twenty two during the events of Raiders (in the midst of this Kasdan quips maybe the protagonist would have been 42 at the time) and that it had been 12 years since she and the two had their affair , making her 10-11 and he 30. However, Spielberg, the eventual director, immediately pushes back on this saying "She had better be older than twenty-two." Lucas himself then keeps hemming on the specific age, seemingly settling on 15 as the ceiling of what could be considered "interesting", though he's the only one continuing on about the specific age. While Spielberg does afterward latch onto the idea of her being the one to spur on the initial relationship, I think it's fair to say that Spielberg was not into the idea of the age gap being that large or that early on in her life, and Kasdan, who eventually wrote the screenplay, stays off that specific bit entirely thereafter. I also wanna reiterate this is from an unverified source, and one that still only posits what's basically just a first pass stream-of-thought brainstorming session as opposed to an establishment of canon. This also is to say nothing of the personal interpretations of Karen Allen of Harrison Ford themselves and what they injected into their portrayals of these characters and their backstories.
In the end, then, who "owns" Indiana Jones and gets to say what is or isn't part of the facts of the story beyond what's on-screen or within the work itself? I don't know for sure, but frankly, I think there's a statue of limitations on this kind of behind the scenes/supplemental stuff where honestly I think the responsibility is on the individual to decide for themselves, especially with a near 40-year-old cultural touch stone like this one that now belongs more to the public consciousness than the original creators. I'll say this though: Lucas clearly already had more than a few screws loose long before he splurted out the Star Wars prequels.
Indy himself being a morally gray/kinda shitty protagonist is absolutely nothing new in the context of the rest of the movie. Regarding this exchange in particular, "child" could absolutely be interpreted in the context of intellectual or social maturity as opposed to literal age and Indy being a literal pedophile, and no age for either of them is ever given. However, it certainly does not paint Indy as being in the right, whatever unfolded between the two of them, and he gets called out for his shitty attitude by Marion directly. And regardless, as for the audience's culpability, in general I think there's a big difference between appreciating/enjoying a film/piece of art and idolizing/condoning (either in part or as a whole) the creators, individual characters, or the moral stances taken by them.
All this being said, there's a lot of stuff swirling around about the "canon" in the context of this scene, so in the interest of getting the facts out there, whatever they might be, I decided to do some digging myself: *deep breath*
Raiders is set in 1936. While her age is never revealed in the dialogue or otherwise, the original screenplay as written by Kasdan (search "INT. "THE RAVEN" SALOON - PATAN, NEPAL - NIGHT") explicitly introduces Marion as 25 in the scene (thus born in 1911), and subtracting 10 years would make her 15 at their last meeting as described in their conversation. That being said I think there's also room to interpret the "10 years" as spoken as potentially being anywhere between 8-12 years seeing as 10 years is a commonly rounded time range. Regardless though, whether she was legally a minor under modern standards, she was definitely implied to be at best borderline when they presumably had their affair. However, NOWHERE in even the Raiders screenplay is Indy's age ever specifically mentioned, but based on the dialogue it's implied that he's at least several years older than she is and it's safe to assume he was past adulthood. It also does not mention anything specifically about what they did together, though again it's implied at least that there was significant emotional involvement on Marion's part. But that's the end of it in the script, and Raiders ends Kasdan's involvement in the series entirely.
In a similar fashion, Temple of Doom begins in 1935 but with no explicit mention of Indy's age either. Last Crusade opens on what's almost certainly a teenage Indy though the year of that sequence is never established, only that we rejoin Indy aboard the boat off the Portuguese coast in 1938. And just to be sure, checking the Crystal Skull screenplay (search "EXT TRAIN STATION DAY"), Mutt, who Marion says is Indy's son, is described as being 20 years old, and so based on the screenplay starting in Nevada, 1957, that places Mutt being born/conceived around 1936-1937, which is during/after the events of Raiders. Still no explicit mention of Indy's age.
Now if you wanna talk about the entirety of Indiana Jones media, The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles TV show does explicitly establish Indy as having been born on July 1, 1899, which would have made him around his mid twenties to Marion's mid-teens when they were last involved prior to Raiders. I think it's important to note though that this was a series produced by Lucas 8 years after the original movie and with zero credit to Spielberg who directed the original film series or Kasdan who wrote the original Raiders screenplay. This is especially key considering the last, though loosest, bit of metatext.
There is on the internet a supposed transcript of a Raiders story conference with Spielberg, Lucas, and Kasdan dated January 1978, 6 years prior to the film's release and nearly 2 years prior to the full screenplay drafted in December 1979. As to its legitimacy, the only mention I've found is in an interview with Kasdan, where it is proffered to Kasdan who acknowledges its existence though doesn't verify the entirety of its contents. With that in mind, on page 25 of this transcript, in opening discussion about the heretofore unnamed "girl", it's put forth by Kasdan, the eventual screenplay writer, that she and the heretofore unnamed protagonist should have a pre-existing romantic involvement. Lucas, as the original concept creator, is the one who posits making her twenty two during the events of Raiders (in the midst of this Kasdan quips maybe the protagonist would have been 42 at the time) and that it had been 12 years since she and the two had their affair , making her 10-11 and he 30. However, Spielberg, the eventual director, immediately pushes back on this saying "She had better be older than twenty-two." Lucas himself then keeps hemming on the specific age, seemingly settling on 15 as the ceiling of what could be considered "interesting", though he's the only one continuing on about the specific age. While Spielberg does afterward latch onto the idea of her being the one to spur on the initial relationship, I think it's fair to say that Spielberg was not into the idea of the age gap being that large or that early on in her life, and Kasdan, who eventually wrote the screenplay, stays off that specific bit entirely thereafter. I also wanna reiterate this is from an unverified source, and one that still only posits what's basically just a first pass stream-of-thought brainstorming session as opposed to an establishment of canon. This also is to say nothing of the personal interpretations of Karen Allen of Harrison Ford themselves and what they injected into their portrayals of these characters and their backstories.
In the end, then, who "owns" Indiana Jones and gets to say what is or isn't part of the facts of the story beyond what's on-screen or within the work itself? I don't know for sure, but frankly, I think there's a statue of limitations on this kind of behind the scenes/supplemental stuff where honestly I think the responsibility is on the individual to decide for themselves, especially with a near 40-year-old cultural touch stone like this one that now belongs more to the public consciousness than the original creators. I'll say this though: Lucas clearly already had more than a few screws loose long before he splurted out the Star Wars prequels.
Last edited:
The actual script is vague about it and it could be a euphemism or exaggeration, that's how we're supposed to read into it years later. The same way I might say "man I was a stupid fucking kid..." When talking about some idiotic transgression in my early 20s or late teens.
But..... George Lucas also had originally formulated this to be legit child love, Marion being 11, and that indies flawed womanizing would be a part of his character. Thank god someone told him like "George .......best to drop that one, sure, sure in 1936 everybody was hooking up with 11 year olds but..... Let's just make it vague."
But..... George Lucas also had originally formulated this to be legit child love, Marion being 11, and that indies flawed womanizing would be a part of his character. Thank god someone told him like "George .......best to drop that one, sure, sure in 1936 everybody was hooking up with 11 year olds but..... Let's just make it vague."
I normally agree with you but Indy has always been a misogynist. Still like the movies and Indy but let's be honest, he's an asshole
The dude admitted to at the very least emotionally manipulating a teenager, then engaging in another relationship with her 10 years later only to immediately abandon her again, and then only checks in with her once more 20 years later on account of coincidentally running into the son he sired with her last time out (wherein we learn not only did he run off the last time but he ran off just days before they were to be wed). This is also to say nothing of Winnie who's literally never heard from again following the events of Temple of Doom. Even on screen he's generally dismissive and condescending to every woman he meets. Misogyny is literally part of Indy's DNA, of course he's kinda shitty, though it's part of what makes him feel like a real figure that's interesting to watch as opposed to some cardboard cutout. But I think people tend to get those two aspects of character mixed up subconsciously.
that kind of thing was more culturally permissible back in the 20s
my great grandfather married my great grandmother when she was 15 apparently, that would have been around 1920
i wont condone indy's actions but i also consider them in the context of the time period
plus nobody ever claimed indy was a respectable guy, the hero of a movie isnt necessarily always an ideal role model
i dont think anybody was supposed to watch that scene and think what he did was good
i think the entire point of that information is to establish that he's kind of an asshole
it's not meant to be condoned by the audience
sometimes protagonists do shitty things, not everyone is captain america
my great grandfather married my great grandmother when she was 15 apparently, that would have been around 1920
i wont condone indy's actions but i also consider them in the context of the time period
plus nobody ever claimed indy was a respectable guy, the hero of a movie isnt necessarily always an ideal role model
i dont think anybody was supposed to watch that scene and think what he did was good
i think the entire point of that information is to establish that he's kind of an asshole
it's not meant to be condoned by the audience
sometimes protagonists do shitty things, not everyone is captain america
Well this was google trip I didn't expect to take this morning.
George Lucas wanted Marion to be young as 11 for when she had sexual relationship with Indie, but Spielberg and others pushed back so Lucas generously bumped her age to 15 because "16 or 17 isn't interesting anymore" apparently.
Raiders of the Lost Ark supposedly(been ages since I have seen it) leaves her age vague and just implies a lot about it, but in novelization of Raiders of the Lost Ark it's stated that she was 15 when she started sexual relationship with Indie. 16 or 17 when he ditched her.
At best Indie just had sexual relationship with underage girl (some would say child) and at worse he groomed her for it.
George Lucas wanted Marion to be young as 11 for when she had sexual relationship with Indie, but Spielberg and others pushed back so Lucas generously bumped her age to 15 because "16 or 17 isn't interesting anymore" apparently.
Raiders of the Lost Ark supposedly(been ages since I have seen it) leaves her age vague and just implies a lot about it, but in novelization of Raiders of the Lost Ark it's stated that she was 15 when she started sexual relationship with Indie. 16 or 17 when he ditched her.
At best Indie just had sexual relationship with underage girl (some would say child) and at worse he groomed her for it.
Last edited:
I mean he's got a lot of James Bond DNA in him, so it is not surprising these womanizing elements are such a big part of his character.
This is how I've always taken it, even when I was super young. I didn't even know "Indy being a pedophile??" was a thing.
A modern era...
That's how we got the Mummy reboot thank you very much
When you read Lolita and just get carried away because it's a great book.
Yeeeeeeeah it's some Leon the Professional level shit here.My brother is a massive Indiana Jones fan. He said he recently read something which was a transcription or something of the writers talking about creating the script for Raiders. Lucas originally said out loud something like what if Marion was 11 and she came on to Indy first? Spielberg then said something like "Uh I don't think that's a good idea."
Edit: I think it's from this:
Indiana Jones was an abusive creep (but he was almost much worse)
Watching movies you loved as a child is a fascinating way to learn about what you cared about back then, versus what catches your attention now. I recently re-watched Raiders of the Lost Ark,...www.polygon.com
I'd always been on the "poorly chosen line of dialogue" train on this one and didn't think she meant she was literally a child... but I don't even know anymore tbh.
Oof... guess I do now.
11???
Oof... guess I do now.
11???
so is Han and soo is Harrison...lol he is literally a professional asshole... he is still the GOAT though!
It's kinda weird how (as far as I recall) when Young Indy came around they pretty much eliminated him as a womaniser. Although I vaguely recall a plot line of him getting his heart broken that might've been intended as a 'why I don't trust women' moment. He also did have a relationship with Mata Hari, admittedly.
I'm gonna look into it.
I'm gonna look into it.
Make sense to me. Indiana Jones takes place in like the 1930s, right? A 26 years old dating a 16 years old would hardly be weird within that time period. My grandmother got married when she was goddamn 14. It's not pedophilia as we know it today, it was just... Life I guess. Yeah, Indiana Jones is a man in the 30's, he's obviously going to be an asshole and a misogynist.
I never saw the movie as taking away Marion agency or making Indiana seem like a gentleman really... Which is I think how these issues should be approached in movies taking place in different time periods.
I never saw the movie as taking away Marion agency or making Indiana seem like a gentleman really... Which is I think how these issues should be approached in movies taking place in different time periods.
Pretty much yeah. I hate that rather than acknowledge the basic facts about the fictional character, people would rather reduce themselves to tap dancing around if not excusing pedophilia (fuck your pedo, grooming grandparents!) or carving out the difference between it and ephebophilia. It's clear the "I was a child" line was literal regardless of what people want it to mean.
Look, all that matters is what's in the movie. Everything else, you can take it as you like, as long as you find justification for it in the movie, it's okay, after it's out there, your interpretation is your interpretation, and as long as you didn't need to make a logic pretzel to come to your opinion, it's cool.
I prefer to think of Indy as a good guy, beating up on Nazis, not a pedophile, not racist, etc, even if it might not make much sense when thinking about the time period, as long as the movie doesn't explicitly tells me I'm wrong, my interpretation is ok.
I prefer to think of Indy as a good guy, beating up on Nazis, not a pedophile, not racist, etc, even if it might not make much sense when thinking about the time period, as long as the movie doesn't explicitly tells me I'm wrong, my interpretation is ok.
I'm sure that Lucas like much of the film industry had a blindspot for this kind of stuff. I can recommended the Lolita podcast from iheartradio After that Im not surprised anymore when I hear about something like this.
This was literally in the previous Indy Jones thread here. Just search for it.
This is Era baby and if we aren't tripping over each other on some holier than thou bullshit...then whats the point? Lol
Yeah I took it as she was naive and young and Indy definitely dipped out after having his fun. Really shitty move and was probably supposed to show the audience that he is definitely flawed and fucked up in some ways. Through a modern lense, creepy as all hell. Back then probably not as much. Doesn't make it right but it is what it is.
Somehow I hadn't put these two things together.
It's never out and out stated why Indy and Ravenwood fell out, right? That would make sense.
Yeah. Without the context of the the Polygon article, I assumed (based on the players' ages), that Marion was about 20 and Indy was about 30 when the romance took place "ten years ago". She would have been young enough to not know better, but old enough that it wouldn't have been vomitously gross that he was romancing her, more of a garden-variety grossness.
I mean, look at Parasite. A clearly college-aged man tutors and seduces a high school girl.A while back I watched a popular Korean movie from 2004 called My Little Bride on Amazon Prime, and I kept wondering how Era would view this film. It's a love story between a 16-year-old girl and a college student. I don't remember if they ever say how old the guy is supposed to be, but the actors had a six-year age gap and it showed.