It doesn't make sense...

M1917 · Post by **M1917** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 1:17 pm

I was thinking about firearms the other day (as I often do), and it came to me...

Indy, being a man of adventure, and a Great War veteran, would want to carry the most powerful handgun available. The .45 caliber handguns of WWI would fit that bill nicely. The second model hand ejector, or in it's military configuration, the Smith and Wesson M1917, would be cheap and readily available. Because of that, they would be easily modified, as Indy's cut-down barrel was. ToD takes place before Raiders, and Indy carries a .45 ACP Colt New Service...at least that's a rubber one that bounces off the running board. We all know that Harrison is actually firing the banded sight S&W out of the moving car.

Now we go to 1938. Why is Indy carrying an obsolete weapon? The Webley WG was supplanted by the Mk I, and the Mk VI was carried in the Great War. Why would he carry a black powder framed weapon, that was bigger and heavier than the revolvers he carried before? If anything, Indy learned from his mastakes. He loses his gun in ToD, so he carries a backup (the Browning) in Raiders. It would make more sense to convert a more modern revolver (like the Mk VI), that was designed to use smokeless powder. But even so, the Webley is a big horsey piece, compared to his S&W.

I know, I know...it's only a movie.
Respectfully,
Fritz

PyramidBlaster · Post by **PyramidBlaster** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 2:08 pm

Why? Because it LOOKS cool, that's why....Mighty fine piece, I must say...

But i'd have to say the M1917 represents a better balance of reliability and stopping power under adverse conditions...At least at that time....

carebear · Post by **carebear** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 2:10 pm

The Webley was still perfectly adequate for the task. Reliable and hard-hitting. Why get rid of something you're familiar with that does the job just fine?

To maybe save a few ounces?

He's not a gunfighter, he's an archeologist who carries a gun because sometimes he needs protection while doing his job. I would hope he very rarely ever has to actually use it.

But if he does, I want it caught on film, cause regular archeology doesn't make for an exciting movie.

M1917 · Post by **M1917** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 2:34 pm

...it does look cool, and there's something to be said for style points, but...

whipwarrior · Post by **whipwarrior** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 3:02 pm

It's just a really cool-looking gun, regardless of its impracticality in the world of 1938 and beyond. Webleys always did have nice lines... and just like a good fedora, style is timeless.

Snakewhip_Sable · Post by **Snakewhip_Sable** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 3:07 pm

I would think the ammo would be more easily available around the world than for that of other, more 'modern' weapons.

M1917 · Post by **M1917** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 4:22 pm

.45 ACP was a truly American round. It wouldn't have been readily available in Europe until WWII. So I imagine Indy carried a box of .45's in his gas mask bag, along with his other effects. .455 Webley would be available in Europe, India, and anywhere else the Empire reigned. So in a strange way, it makes sense. The Webley is a pretty pistol to be sure. In 1957, the .45 ACP would be as common around the world as the .455 would be in the 30's.

Only my opinion ladies and gents. That and .50 cents will get you a cup of coffee.

Rook · Post by **Rook** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 6:41 pm

Why does that one guy at the local gun club compete in local shooting competitions with a wheelgun while all the younger guys use Glocks and Colts?

Personal preference.

Russ

raider 57 · Post by **raider 57** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 6:56 pm

Rook wrote:Why does that one guy at the local gun club compete in local shooting competitions with a wheelgun while all the younger guys use Glocks and Colts?

Personal preference.

Russ

I agree Rook. It's not unusual for guys (or gals) to stick with a favorite weapon. For any number of reasons, grip / hand comfort,familiarity, personal accuracy, personal experience concerning reliability, or even just purchase price. None of which are particularly "logical" reasons. Maybe Indy just resisted change!

-raider 57

Snakewhip_Sable · Post by **Snakewhip_Sable** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 7:39 pm

raider 57 wrote:Maybe Indy just resisted change!

Other than wearing the bag strap on the outside of his jacket, I think you're right.

M1917 · Post by **M1917** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 7:56 pm

...I'm a cowboy action shooter. The only semi-auto I have in my collection these days is my Browning clone. I prefer my cartridge conversion Navies, much for the same reasons you speak of.

Still can't wait for the moive!

raider 57 · Post by **raider 57** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 3:30 pm

M1917 wrote:
Still can't wait for the moive!

Wow!! Right! Now that I think about it..........It's gonna be here REAL SOON!!

-raider 57

bigrex · Post by **bigrex** » Mon Apr 14, 2008 1:50 am

M1917 wrote:I was thinking about firearms the other day (as I often do), and it came to me...

Now we go to 1938. Why is Indy carrying an obsolete weapon? Why would he carry a black powder framed weapon, that was bigger and heavier than the revolvers he carried before?
Fritz

I think the Webley sort of fit the tone of the LC movie. It's sort of a big clunky, funny looking gun, everything in LC was exaggerated and humor was the emphasis, the gun was no exception.

M1917 · Post by **M1917** » Mon Apr 14, 2008 6:39 am

...that fits as well. Particularly the part where Indy forgets to load it.

starwarsfanatic · Post by **starwarsfanatic** » Thu May 01, 2008 8:19 am

Why does that one guy at the local gun club compete in local shooting competitions with a wheelgun while all the younger guys use Glocks and Colts?

Personal preference.

Russ

Because if you are looking for absolutely BLAZING speed you use a wheelgun.

http://www.blutube.com/Clip.aspx?key=D6E65533722969A7

He did 8 rounds in 1 sec on 1 target, he did 8 rounds on 4 targets in 1.06 sec, and he did 6 shots-reload-6 shots in 2.99 sec

That is why a real competition shooter uses a wheel gun against an automatic.

hocfutue · Post by **hocfutue** » Thu May 01, 2008 2:11 pm

If you are regularly covered in dust and mud, in jungles/deserts, dragged behind trucks, etc., a revolver is a lot less likely to jam than an auto.

Also, if you are most familiar and capable with a particular firearm, you're more likely to carry that one, regardless of the latest toy on the block. I've trained with and carried a 1911 for a number of years. I trust the action, like the ergonomics. Sure, some Glocks are lighter, hold more ammo, etc. But I hate the double-action trigger pull on them, don't like the doublestack grip feel, and prefer the .45 round. So I stick with the 1911.

Kinda ties in with something my grandmother once said: "It's not what's between your hands, it's what's between your ears."

IndyWannaBee · Post by **IndyWannaBee** » Thu May 01, 2008 5:06 pm

Now in IJ4 it is 1950! Why is he STILL not carrying something more powerful?

Like a nice M1911A1 Colt 45........

Post by **Michaelson** » Thu May 01, 2008 5:09 pm

The ONLY reason Indy has the Webley is because Rob MacGregor saw one in a gun shop, thought it was neat looking, and wrote it into the LC storyline.

He told me this himself while consulting with me on guns for his book/program 'Amazon' several years ago.

No other reason than an authors whim, plain and simple.

Regards! Michaelson

Thefumegator · Post by **Thefumegator** » Thu May 01, 2008 10:52 pm

If you are regularly covered in dust and mud, in jungles/deserts, dragged behind trucks, etc., a revolver is a lot less likely to jam than an auto.

Actually, one of the primary reasons that militaries around the world transitioned to the autoloader was the fact that automatics were less prone to problems in dirt and mud. Gunk in the mechanism of a revolver can lock them up tight.

As a general rule, revolvers deal better with neglect, autos deal better with abuse.

FWIW, I was hoping to see the S&W 1917 in KOTCS... *sigh* Ah, well.

Wes

bigrex · Post by **bigrex** » Thu May 01, 2008 11:03 pm

Michaelson wrote:The ONLY reason Indy has the Webley is because Rob MacGregor saw one in a gun shop, thought it was neat looking, and wrote it into the LC storyline.

He told me this himself while consulting with me on guns for his book/program 'Amazon' several years ago.

No other reason than an authors whim, plain and simple.

Regards! Michaelson

Well, straight from the horse's mouth, can't argue with that. At least my guess made sense, I never would have guessed what actually took place. It stands to reason that fact is stranger than fiction. The Webley has got to be one of the funniest and most ungainly looking revolvers ever made. (That's only my opinion folks and not a FACT, I'm sure you figured that one out).

Texas Jones · Post by **Texas Jones** » Fri May 02, 2008 9:42 am

Michaelson wrote:The ONLY reason Indy has the Webley is because Rob MacGregor saw one in a gun shop, thought it was neat looking, and wrote it into the LC storyline.

He told me this himself while consulting with me on guns for his book/program 'Amazon' several years ago.

No other reason than an authors whim, plain and simple.

Regards! Michaelson

But Indy has one in LC. Rob M didn't have a say in what he carried in the film, right?

I guess the Webley is unique as no other film hero carries one. Like Brendan Frasier carrying those French revolvers in the Mummy series. Of course that one is explained since he fought in the French foreign legion.

Post by **Michaelson** » Fri May 02, 2008 1:23 pm

MacGrager wrote the LC script/book, and they took his suggestion to heart when they shot the film. They just kept the weapon in the new film as well, as they thought it was so well received in the 3rd film, why change?

Like I said, that's what he told me, so don't shoot the messenger!

Regards! Michaelson

hocfutue · Post by **hocfutue** » Fri May 02, 2008 2:36 pm

I think we're all overlooking the main reason Indy or any of us carry a Webley.

Chicks dig Webleys.

I mean, they do, don't they? Or did the guy at the gun shop make that up? 8-[

Solent MKIII · Post by **Solent MKIII** » Tue Jun 03, 2008 5:02 am

Oh man, I just put a S&W on layaway.

Do chicks dig on those too?

:junior:

BroadSword · Post by **BroadSword** » Tue Jun 03, 2008 11:24 am

M1917 wrote:.45 ACP was a truly American round. It wouldn't have been readily available in Europe until WWII. So I imagine Indy carried a box of .45's in his gas mask bag, along with his other effects. .455 Webley would be available in Europe, India, and anywhere else the Empire reigned. So in a strange way, it makes sense. The Webley is a pretty pistol to be sure. In 1957, the .45 ACP would be as common around the world as the .455 would be in the 30's.

Only my opinion ladies and gents. That and .50 cents will get you a cup of coffee.

This was exactly my line of thought as well. Guns are cool, but only paper weights without rounds!

pigirondan · Post by **pigirondan** » Tue Jun 03, 2008 2:36 pm

Indy doesn't live in a vacuum. It would be safe to assume that he loses his handguns as often as his hat falls off. Anything surplus would fit the bill. (As long as it fit his holster.

) I just don't see him buying new.

If there is another film, post 1957, we might see a 1911 or 1911A1 make it's way into his hands. Since, by that time, they were being released for sale.

Texas Jones · Post by **Texas Jones** » Thu Jun 05, 2008 1:53 pm

Michaelson wrote:MacGrager wrote the LC script/book

I thought it was Jeffery Boam?

3thoubucks · Post by **3thoubucks** » Mon Jun 09, 2008 5:18 am

Sean Connery and Webly in "Zardoz", a sci-fi movie I saw in the 70's, and I really took note of that gun. Maybe has something to do with why they wrote one into LC?

Solent MKIII · Post by **Solent MKIII** » Mon Jun 09, 2008 6:00 pm

Good thing the "Zardoz" costume designer didn't work on LC!

:junior:

3thoubucks · Post by **3thoubucks** » Mon Jun 09, 2008 8:51 pm

Agreed!

I was wondering if Connery and Michael Caine carried Weblys in "The Man Who Would be King" , didn't find a pic with Google Image search, but it made me think Caine might have had one in "Zulu"

Two of the three bumbling soldiers of fortune, Smiley and Jake, in "The Mummy Returns" have Weblys, both seemto be WG's. One of the three soldiers guarding the "dry well" in "Hidalgo" takes a shot at Vigo with a Webly, which would have to be a WG, if it's period acurate.

thefish · Post by **thefish** » Sat Jun 14, 2008 10:22 am

I think a lot of it in KotCS is that Indy is using what you guys are calling an "Outdated Weapon," as he himself is a relic to a different time, and the whole thing with the old hat, the old gun, and the old man is a central theme throughout the film.

The gun represents Indy remaining true to himself, and not changing with the times. He's not clinging to the past. He's just a stubborn SOB that refuses to give up what he holds dear.

The film itself represents the transition from action adventure pulp films of the 30's and 40's to the Sci-Fi Alien Invasion films of the 50's, (and those were indicative of the time as well. The action adventure: Fighting the bad guys who wanted to take over the world. Stopping Fascists and Nazis. The same themes of WWII. To fear of the Alien. The other amongst us, trying to take over our world in secret. The Cold War.)

The world has moved on, and Indiana Jones has not. He's as much a relic as the things he digs up. The imagery is all throughout the film...."Not as Easy as it used to be." Indy standing in the shadow of the Mushroom Cloud. This is a different world than the one that Indy used to be master and commander of, and that is drawn in sharp contrast as he stands there, helpless, wounded, exhausted, watching the concept of war change.

The touch of a button. Hundreds of thousands dead. No mess. No face-to-face combat. And with the Cold War, no face-to-face enemy. Just cloak and dagger. This new world is completely outside his paradigm. He's survived when so many of his contemporaries have burned out, and he's left behind to fade away.

Mac gets this new world, and is playing both sides against the middle. The Russians versus the Americans, with him in the middle making a profit. He's figured it out. Indy's figured it out too, but his hard-learned, old-fashioned values won't let him go that route anymore than he could ever be "Pushed out of the light" by the likes of Rene Belloq, (and don't we face this too? Those of us who are labeled naive or misanthropic for sticking to our guns as our parents and grandparents taught us?)

He's angry and confused at being blacklisted, and his patriotism brought into question. The Powers-that-Be consider him washed up. He's the last of a dying breed. He's angry. He's bitter. His only real chance is those who know him, who served with him and under him, but they're moving on with their lives or retired already. The people who are coming up in the ranks are part of this new modern warfare, and look at Indy's attire, tools and tactics the way a modern Military officer looks at WWII weapons and armor in a museum. Indy's facing extinction.

The Crystal Skull is really the bridge for Indy. A link between the heyday of action/adventure archeology and modern alien invasion Sci-Fi, and the quest to return the skull can also be seen as a Campbellesque Hero's Journey for Indiana to cross that bridge. To adjust himself to the modern world, (or rather find a happy medium in which he can remain Indiana Jones, and the world can change.)

Indiana is STILL Indiana, Whip-Crackin', Haymaker Throwin, Fedora Wearin' old man that could kick the posterior of any beefy brawler a 3rd of his age and up. But now, he's bridged the gap. He's got the desk job, (Associate Dean at Barnett,) he's got his Nuclear Family, (wife and a son, though I don't expect that they'll have cookouts or neighborhood potlucks. I'd imagine that Thanksgiving Dinner around the Jones table looks NOTHING like a Norman Rockwell painting!) He's got his legacy, (Mutt, someone to teach his skills to, someone to carry on his adventures.)

Well there's my convoluted ideas as to why the Webley. It became far more than that.

Sorry.

-Dan

Carolina Tom · Post by **Carolina Tom** » Sat Feb 28, 2009 7:04 am

Makes sense, because maybe he would pick up whatever was available locally and cheap. Carrying guns on airplanes and through customs could have been a problem, even back then. You get it when you get there and throw it away when you're done. Just found this thread-maybe its been said before. Tom

carebear · Post by **carebear** » Sat Feb 28, 2009 7:35 pm

Carolina Tom wrote:Makes sense, because maybe he would pick up whatever was available locally and cheap. Carrying guns on airplanes and through customs could have been a problem, even back then. You get it when you get there and throw it away when you're done. Just found this thread-maybe its been said before. Tom

Carrying guns on planes wasn't illegal in the States until the early '60s. It was all up to the particular airlines rules.

Without magnetometers searching wouldn't be effective anyway. The willingness of honest folks to submit to a pat down just wasn't there back in the good old days.

Most countries Indy would go to outside of "civilization" would either have been wide open, would be easy to "fix" at customs or would have different rules for "respectable foreigners".

Kim Hoffman · Post by **Kim Hoffman** » Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:45 pm

"I was thinking about firearms the other day (as I often do), and it came to me... "

I would tend to agree with you. A .45. Revolver or 1911A1 Govt Model.

But then we all have our favorites. As an archeologist, Indiana Jones very likely carried a pistol as he would any other tool - a tool necessary in some far off and mysterious land.

And from a movie perspective, the Webley does have some panache.

Imahomer · Post by **Imahomer** » Fri Mar 06, 2009 7:56 pm

Least we not forget that Indy probably carried what the writer and director told him to carry.

It doesn't make sense...

It doesn't make sense...

I agree...

Hmmm...

I use wheelguns because...

Re: I use wheelguns because...

Re: It doesn't make sense...

I hadn't thought about it that way before...

Re: Hmmm...

Re: It doesn't make sense...

Re: It doesn't make sense...

Re: It doesn't make sense...

Re: It doesn't make sense...