Innnnnnnnndyyyyyyyy yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy !!!!!!!!!
-
tbreiden37 — 18 years ago(January 27, 2008 02:12 PM)
I thought she was real BAD in Temple of Doom and watching the documentaries you got the idea that she only got the part because Spielberg had the HOTS for her. She admitted to not even reading the script very carefully and that she basically whined and complained her way out of a scene with snakes she was unaware was even in the movie. She supposedly drags Spielberg around by his you know what, in their marriage as well.
-
Raskel — 18 years ago(January 29, 2008 02:17 PM)
She supposedly drags Spielberg around by his you know what, in their marriage as well.
if that's the case he doesn't seem to mind, considering the fact they've been married quite a few years already
For the record; I'm a Willy fan
Me? I'm the eternal optimist. The glass is always half full on this end -
shifty-jones — 18 years ago(July 28, 2007 06:15 PM)
i think she was actually LESS annoying than the one in Raiders. that chick pissed me off! especially because her father taught Indy "everything he knew" or whatever, so why was she so stupid?! i dunno, i just thought she played her character well and that her acting fit the character alot better than the other actresses in the other movies.
-
axiomattic — 18 years ago(January 06, 2008 09:14 AM)
I think coming back with Marion was the right choice. Marion is a natural. She's not superficial as much as Willie was. Kate Capshaw's character was annoying and just liked Indy for his macho, adventurous guy side, while Marion had a real past with him. It was his first love, while Willie was the famous clubgirl, suited for the 90'S. At first I thought it was a mistake to have Indy depicted as mysoginistic at her sides but when I saw how my mom enjoyed the new physical Indy as opposed to the intellectual one in the First movie, I understood that Spielberg was trying to grab a different audience. I just love the fact that they're back with Marion. There's something natural and pure in her eyes.
-
