[J m HofMarN]

Holy fuck... I hadn't seen this movie since I was a kid and now watching it again... It really displays every bit of George Lucas weirdness, stuff that was only hinted at in Star Wars. In what way is this stuff acceptable?

The "Traditional Indian Dinner" scene is probably the most offensive thing I've ever seen. As a chef who's cooked Indian food I know the basic tenents of their culinary system, and a meal in India without yogurt, rice, vegetables or curry, which instead involves an array of non-edible and in some cases still living animals and animal parts, it's just horribly misleading. I really enjoy Indian food and what I've learned about it, but then I've also had to address myths about eyeballs and monkey brains from people that don't know any better.

Also there's the two instances where the British Raj is mentioned. They could have explored the brutality of English occupation, the millions who starved, etc. Instead they mutter about how they feel like well cared for children, and then in the end the British troops come and save the day in a big fuckoff Deus Ex Machinus.

Oh, and "Miss Scream A Lot" is a character that no longer needs to be seen in movies, ever. Did this actress ever get a part after the film? I should hope not since the only line she was capable of enacting was "EEEEEEEEEEE!" and variations thereof.

Oh, and if you catch a chinese boy picking your pocket he becomes your servant? Like, were there no customs officials that had a problem with this? Little people abound in this movie, once again showing Lucas' love of hordes of short people.

Let's not even mention the "Oh look the white man has come to save us" factor, or the fact that for no reason the otherwise faithful followers of the crazy sacrifice deity begin to cheer when Indy wrecks their temple, apparently showing them the error of their ways. Also, the blood makes you a slave to them unless someone pokes you with a lighter? That's the cure to the ancient black magic? Shorty's escape was brilliant too. Apparently the guards were too busy randomly whipping things and people to, ya know, guard.

I think the most unforgivable sin though is that this movie made me miss the Nazis.

Seriously, Indiana Jones movies require a stuffy English academic, a no nonsense woman, a priceless ancient item (Note: Not just some rock) and plenty of men in jackboots. Sexy women in jackboots are optional, but very much encouraged. This movie had the screamiest, most annoying ditz I've ever seen, no English academic, and no damned Nazis. I realize it was set in 35, but I don't care. I demand Nazis.

[princesskadee]

In regards to the films feature of Indian cuisine, I think they were poking fun at it, sort of tongue-in-cheek. But I can see where some would take offense as percieving it as being an ethnic stereotype.

[MyPantsAreOnFire]

I love the opening sequenece of this film up until they get on the plane. Then it turns into a goddamn mess.

[civilian_number_two]

I have problems with the before-the-story bits in both Indiana Jones sequels. In LAST CRUSADE, Indiana Jones kills everyone on that boat to get back a cross that they found because he thinks it belongs in a museum. Seriously, Indiana Jones murders a bunch of innocent relic hunters just because they have a different idea about where their found treasure should be kept. IN TEMPLE OF DOOM, he starts out the movie in a white tux and tries to exchange a found relic for an expensive diamond. Like, in the prequel he was all about getting people to give him diamonds. Gangsters no less.

The difference between the two is that while I hated the opening of DOOM, I also hated the rest of the movie. With CRUSADE I thought the rest opf the movie was ok.

[J m HofMarN]

In Doom it really looked like they wanted to be James Bond. Crusade is probably my favorite Jones movie, but I have to agree the opening scene was kind of pointless. I could have done with just the backstory of his hat which leads in to his father's presence. There was no need for two openings. And the "It belongs in a museum" speech is really some piss poor motivation. Stolen, needed to ransom a friend, part of some map to a greater treasure, all of these are goals worth maybe killing for. I dunno about "I want kids to yawn at this during field trips"

[Just your average movie goer]

What's this? Fresh criticism for 'Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom"?! Brilliant!

Yes, this film deserves to be crushed into the ground.


As a special treat for you all, I even found my original thread on it. Good times.


Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom

[Spoon Poetic]

I actually just recently watched all three of these movie with my brother, as he'd never seen them. I still find them to be fun movies, but yeah, as I'm older than the last time I saw them (I think I was my brother's age, like 9 or 10), I'm seeing more of the stupidness. But even when I was 9 or however old, the second one, though I loved it for its gore (I was an odd child) I was disappointed that Indy suddenly was all about some fortune and glory. He wasn't the cool college professor with the somewhat-secret life of an adventurer anymore, he was a jerk. I think I read somewhere a while back that there was a different something for this movie, like a different director or someone, that made the changes to make Indy be all about fortune and glory, and then the original one came back for the third movie so Indy went back to just being cool.

And I have lots of Indian friends; my very best friend of 8 years is Indian and so I've been immersed into the culture and have learned a lot about the history, etc. And yes, the movie could be fairly offensive to Indians, if they didn't realize that it was just a movie being stupid, made before the era of PC. (Also, I could be wrong about this, but the god they talk about being so kind and protecting them; Shiva - I know Shiva's the Destroyer. I don't know a lot about Shiva's personality, but being the Destroyer doesn't suggest to me that it's a kind, loving God... I dunno.) But you also have to remember that PC didn't exist back then. Movies just took people that most people don't know a lot about, and ran with them, making them do or be whatever they wanted them to be for the sake of the plot. These days, to make a people like that, they'd make up a name for the country and the people, and make sure that everyone knew this was a made up people/culture. When Indy was made, they didn't have those rules to follow, because no one was all gaga about political correctness. In some ways, that was bad, but I think in other ways, it was good because some of the things that go on these days because of what's perceived as PC or not PC is ridiculous.

None of the Indians I know (which are many) are offended by this movie, because they know it's just ignorant people that just needed a people for a movie. But yeah, there are some dumb things in it that are misleading about the Indian people, and though the gore is fun for a kid, I definitely believe it to be the worst of the trilogy. And I HATED that stupid girl. Though I like Shorty.

[J m HofMarN]

Shorty was hardcore. I mean he just sort of sat there like "Yup, you're whipping me and I'm slightly disturbed by this course of events"

But I dont think the simple fact that movies didnt have to be PC back then saves it. Look at the other two. I think it was in Ark that we see figs or dates being served, and the french archaeologist guy, despite being evil, eats, surprise, edible food. The scenes of Arab, Italian, and even German culture are all fairly accurate. In Crusade we do see a book burning, but the Nazis did that, so it's accurate. Do we see the nazis dining on Jew entrails or drinking the blood of the innocent? No, but you can bet we would have if the team from Temple had been involved.

Also, Temple's use of the occult was nonsense. In the other two films we only see powers being manifested from artifacts. The grail grants life, the ark kills nazis. This makes sense. In Temple we're treated to a man who can effortlessly reach into people's chests and tug out their heart AND keep them alive for no reason I can see.

Also, the stones glow and can catch on fire if Indy tells them to. Also, there's blood that can make you a slave until someone holds a lighter to your tummy. Oh, and the stones will do..... something if they're brought together. Oh, and also, if they're moved from a village that village gets ass raped. In fact I'm surprised that didnt actually happen "Our children were stolen, our crops burned, our water dried up, and we were all anally violated" Come on, that's getting a little bit unbelievable.

Oh and one more comment on the opening: Attention dipshit: YOU HAVE A GUN. Why did you shoot the guy with the antidote? Why didn't you shoot Indiana Jones? Why didn't you give him a poison that, I dunno, doesn't have an irridescent blue antidote? There's no cure for cyanide, you know.

The biggest error though I think is that they made this movie out of a side quest. Indy didn't intend to go on this mission. He couldnt assemble his crack team of English academics and hot, no nonsense woman. He had to make do with what he had, and it showed. In the other two movies Indiana Jones is asked to go on these quests and gets into them of his own free will. In this one he accidentally lands in a village that's been assraped cuz they lost their rock. The premise of the film is based on Indiana Jones screwing up and boarding a plane that says "property of teh villain" on it.

[Just your average movie goer]

Yeah, that last point just sort of sums the whole thing up for me. This wasn't the adventure of an archaelogist who was setting out to find some incredible artifact.

You could just as easily have a small family on vacation stumble across the scenario and pretty much yield the same results... "National Lampoon's Indian Vacation" perhaps?

[Despondent]

I think I read the scene where he tubesleds down the mountain after the plane gives out in a Raiders script somewhere? So yeah, J m, I think you're right. Let's be glad we didn't get a whole new 3-movie set based on some deleted scene the fans already know about.

[Sailor Abbey]

The "Traditional Indian Dinner" scene is probably the most offensive thing I've ever seen. As a chef who's cooked Indian food I know the basic tenents of their culinary system, and a meal in India without yogurt, rice, vegetables or curry, which instead involves an array of non-edible and in some cases still living animals and animal parts, it's just horribly misleading. I really enjoy Indian food and what I've learned about it, but then I've also had to address myths about eyeballs and monkey brains from people that don't know any better.

Yeah, Indian food is awesome. Pakistani food is pretty good too. So is Turkish food - aw hell, I love pretty much all food. Surprisingly enough, American food seems to be just watered down versions of ethnic recipes.

Although our hamburgers are really good. Ok I'm done now.

[Jordan]

The "Traditional Indian Dinner" scene is probably the most offensive thing I've ever seen.

What the hell do you care? My best friend is east Indian, he doesn't even notice this shit.

Let's not even mention the "Oh look the white man has come to save us" factor

God JM. You're one of those guys who'd kiss ass to the one black (or any ethnic dude-just as long as he's not European decent) guy at an all white party. You'd try 'level' with him and probably make him feel uncomfortable by talking about how evil white people are.

[Spoon Poetic]

I didn't say that the not being made in a PC world bit saves it; in fact, I explicitly agreed that it is the worst of the bunch. There are lots of reasons, though, and I don't think it not being PC is the worst of it, or that it's a really huge deal, and don't think it's what ruins the movie.

I saw a Mythbusters where they used Buster to do the Indy stunt where they jumped out the crashing airplane and just came down in the inflatable raft and went BAM onto the mountain and sledded down... Yeah, Buster paid lotsa times. So that stunt should have ended the adventure quite a bit early. Hehheh.

[J m HofMarN]

JYAMG- I think there pretty much was a family in this one between Indy, Screamy McScream, and Short Round.

Jordan-

What the hell do you care? My best friend is east Indian, he doesn't even notice this shit.

I think the East Indies are a different place...
So if I made a movie wherein the characters went to Casa Del Jordan for dinner and ordered Hog guts, living spiders, a live rhinocerous, and chilled snake stomach, you wouldn't have a problem with it?

God JM. You're one of those guys who'd kiss ass to the one black (or any ethnic dude-just as long as he's not European decent) guy at an all white party. You'd try 'level' with him and probably make him feel uncomfortable by talking about how evil white people are.

And you, Jordan, are the fellow who would organize an all white party. I kid. But seriously, it is a TINY bit offensive that in so many movies a white adventurer pops up and the primitive/black/native people make him their god or savior. Do you know WHY this is?

Look back to an old poem, I believe Rudyard Kipling. In the Victorian era when a lot of the adventure-in-undeveloped-country literature was being written Kipling summed up the mindset in his poem "White Man's Burden" in which he claimed it was the responsibility of the "Civilized" white man to "civilize" and bring God to the "Savages" he basically said "We're here to save the indiginous people of the world" Instead of saving you got the British Raj (some millions killed) the Indian genocide (again, several millions killed) slavery, colonization of Africa leading to Apartheid, etc, etc.

Indiana Jones is basically a different spin on H. Ryder Haggard's "King Solomon's Mines" which featured a scene where Quatermain and Co. made the natives think they were gods or something by forecasting a solar eclipse with their superior anglo-saxon intellects. Haggard wasn't that big of a racist, but the Victorian mindset that survives today was evident in his work.

Logic dictates that an intelligent person, upon seeing someone (or three someones) walking around their back yard during a time when their children are being stolen, would not react with "Oh, you must be my savior"

The idea that upon seeing a white man the natives will declare them a god or a saviour is, as I said, party to The White Man's Burden in which Kipling suggests that is the responsibility of caucasians to lead and rule, akhem, "save" native peoples. Their acceptance of this doctrine in film or book is an insult to first nations around the world.

Now get back to that all white party, I think the punch is getting warm.

This post has been edited by J m HofMarN: 08 June 2007 - 12:41 AM

[Slade]

Jordan serves live rhinocerous at his house? That's barbaric! At least kill the animal before you eat it!

Nah, seriously, Temple of Doom was a very dumb movie. Ignoring the monkey brains, it was full of far too many absurdities and plotholes, and like people have been saying, Jones' character, as well as that of Screamy McScream (Willie, I believe, but Screamy fits better) and the whole entire plot kinda killed it. Not even Data playing Short Round could save it.

This is the one good thing to come out of it:


Edit: Fixed the broken image tag.

This post has been edited by Slade: 08 June 2007 - 01:47 PM