Tom Selleck as Indiana Jones

I’ve gotten myself hooked on the Jesse Stone made for TV movies featuring Tom Selleck. First, they aren’t anywhere as cheesy as my gut had me think, in fact they are quite good (Robert B. Parker could really flesh out some characters).

Those have lead me to watch Quigley, Down Under, starring Tom Selleck and filmed back in 1990. I saw that movie when it came out, and felt kinda meh about it. With a rewatching all these years later, I gotta say it was pretty damn good, especially Laura San Giacomo.

This got me thinking about how the Indiana Jones franchise would have fared with Tom Selleck as Indy. I remember the first time hearing it and think “no way”.

I don’t know, I think he would have done a great job as Indy, and Indy would probably be someone different that his character became.

So, what do you all think?

I’ve seen some screen test footage of him as Indy. It wasn’t great, but it was only a screen test. He probably could have done a great job.
Go find High Road to China to see Sellek in a Jonesesque role. Its a lot of fun.

High Road to China really made me grind my teeth. Two open cockpit planes flying next to each other, with the pilots yelling back and forth to each other? You can’t hear one another when you’re in the same plane, much less another one. :mad:

So, no, I never had high expectations for Mr. Selleck (and yet I know that bit wasn’t his fault. But still…)

The scene where Indy shoots the sword-twirling giant instead of indulging him in a long. drawn-out cliche of an action scene wouldn’t have happened (if the legend of its genesis is true, that Ford was sick that day and didn’t feel up to the rigours of an action sequence). It would be a shame if that scene didn’t exist today.

You know, Indiana Jones is such an iconic character that I can’t believe I’m saying this, but… yeah, I think Tom Selleck would have done a fine job. He has the same playful/handsome vibe to him, and could have pulled off the character.

As much as he’s identified by his 'stache, if you think past that he’s actually a lot like Harrison Ford. Ford does a better job at LESS dashing characters; Ford’s work in “Witness” or as Jack Ryan is not dashing at all, and I’m not sure Selleck could have pulled those roles off. But the swashbuckling roles, sure. Selleck made the wrong movie choices, but he was just as good an actor as Ford.

There was a *Magnum PI *episode that spoofed Indiana Jones. Something about “the lost art” of the ancients. I’m sure you could find it on Hulu or IMDb to see how he does.

Here it is: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0639676/

Season 8, episode 10.

Selleck is around 6’4" (John Wayne height) whereas Ford is a normal sized person. That might be enough to make Indiana Jones a substantially different character. Not necessarily worse or better, but it could have upped Indy’s superman aspect while diluting the smart & resourceful aspect.

Mr. Ford did a great job so I can see how people can think Selleck wouldn’t be good. However, he probably would have been a fine Indy.

That’s a fair point. Showing how beat-up Indy was by the end of the first movie (esp. in that scene with Marion in the tramp steamer’s stateroom) wouldn’t have quite the same impact if it was the hulking Tom Selleck.

I think he could’ve done a good job, but I’m still very, very glad Ford got the gig.

Now picture him resorting to gunfire despite being bigger and broader-shouldered than the dude failing to menace him with a sword. :wink:

Somehow this got me thinking about who would be the worst actor for Indie – the name that came instantly to mind is Bobcat Goldwait.

I think Tom Selleck would do fine, and I too find guilty pleasure in the Jesse Stone flicks.

Another candidate – Matt Damon, who I think is very close to Ford in demeanor.

If 6’1" isn’t tall, then I am going to have to spend the rest of the week curled in a corner, hugging my knees to my chest, rocking back and forth, weeping.

Possibly the fact that Damon was 11 years old at the time may have presented a few problems in terms of the plot.

I think he would have done a fine job. And if he had , there would be a thread here asking “What if Harrison Ford had gotten the part?” and pointing to some great iconic scene that doesn’t exist.

Yeah, well, in the reboot of the franchise…

Dennis Quaid would’ve been good too. Not sure if he was the right age at the time, or even out there.

Damned if I can find it now, but I recently saw an article that quoted one of the crew of the movie talking about this scene. The story he told was essentially that they had this huge, elaborate sword fight scene choreographed that was going to take multiple days to shoot on location, and either Spielberg or Lucas pretty much wanted to get out of there quicker, and somebody suggested the alternative of “what if we just have Indy shoot the guy?”.

Stephen Collins did a good turn as an adventurer-type in Tales of the Golden Monkey

According to Wiki:

The fight scenes in the town were filmed in Kairouan [Tunisia]; by then Ford was suffering from dysentery and did not want to film a lengthy fight scene in which Indiana uses his whip to fight off a swordsman. He said to Spielberg “Let’s just shoot the fucker.” Spielberg agreed, scrapped the rest of the fight scene, and filmed the gag of Indiana quickly gunning down the swordsman.

Quaid had already done some movies by 1981, when Raiders was released, but was not nearly as prominent as Ford: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Quaid#Filmography

I could see a young Mark Harmon being cast, too. He’d done quite a bit of TV work by then: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Harmon#Filmography

On the other hand, Ford was born in 1942, Quaid in 1954 and Harmon in 1951, so an almost-decade-younger Indy would’ve changed the feel of the character a bit, I think.

Matt Damon? C’mon. He has all the charisma of a sock puppet.

Now Kurt Russell would have made a great Indy. Imagine *Raiders *meets *Big Trouble In Little China. * There’s a movie for you.