...is annoying as hell, but otherwise this is a very entertaining, action filled movie!
684 Reviews
Kate Capshaw...
warrencorson28019 September 2018
A darker adventure for Indy but still a thrill ride.
davidandrewvantonder28 December 2018
An indication of the personal termoil that Spielberg and Lucas were experiencing at the time, this is a darker, more ominous installment in the franchise although still a rip roaring adventure despite some of the political incorrectness that often dates older films.
Not as charming as the original but a solid action adventure movie which stands on its own.
Perpetually Entertaining...
Xstal6 June 2022
The Cult of Thuggees seek to plunder, Sankara Stones and all their wonder, an archaeologist will resist, using whips and guns and fist, in a treasure of a film packed with adventure.
There are puzzles to be solved and riddles broken, the dialogue's a joy, beautifully spoken, action packed from start to end, returns a massive dividend, engaging all the way and thought provoking.
There are puzzles to be solved and riddles broken, the dialogue's a joy, beautifully spoken, action packed from start to end, returns a massive dividend, engaging all the way and thought provoking.
One of my favorite sequels!
Smells_Like_Cheese23 November 2003
I know that there are a lot of haters when it comes to Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, it has it's flaws and is by no means the strongest movie of the Indiana Jones series, but I just have so many good memories about this film and still to this day when I watch it, it gives me chills and excitement. The characters are memorable, the script is great, and Indiana is still pulling in the action packed excitement continuing from Raiders of the Lost Ark. The direction, editing, even the special effects are great. You have to love Short Round and Willy, the two new side kicks to Indiana's new adventure. Now I agree, Willy can get a little annoying here and there, but she was just so hilarious in that scene with the bugs and having to save Indiana and Short Round. Plus, Short Round has some of the most memorable lines of the entire series "Okey, dokey, Dr. Jones, hold on to your potato!", cheesy, but so funny. Harrison Ford still has Indiana down to a tee, this was the role that was meant for him.
In this prequel, we start off in China on a trade off gone wrong with Lao Che, he ends up meeting a beautiful and very high maintence American girl, Willie. They escape together with Indiana's little side kick, Short Round and accidentally without knowing, they've escaped onto Lao Che's air plane. They wind up in India, where they find out about these rocks that can restore the village they're in, also the children have been kidnapped by Mola Ram and Indiana must free the kids and restore the rocks so the village can be safe again.
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom is a fun sequel, I don't know why people complain so much about it. I can understand if people say it's the weakest of the series, but on it's own, this is a fantastic movie. It's one of my biggest recommendations to my friends as well as other film viewers. It just has everything you could want: action, romance, alligators, and heart sacrifices, lol, OK, that sounded gross, just trust me this that this is such a fun movie. It's one of my favorite films, I know that sounds bad, but I just love this film. It's a lot of fun and Indiana and Short Round are just the best buddies to watch argue on screen. This is an awesome sequel, definitely a must see.
9/10
In this prequel, we start off in China on a trade off gone wrong with Lao Che, he ends up meeting a beautiful and very high maintence American girl, Willie. They escape together with Indiana's little side kick, Short Round and accidentally without knowing, they've escaped onto Lao Che's air plane. They wind up in India, where they find out about these rocks that can restore the village they're in, also the children have been kidnapped by Mola Ram and Indiana must free the kids and restore the rocks so the village can be safe again.
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom is a fun sequel, I don't know why people complain so much about it. I can understand if people say it's the weakest of the series, but on it's own, this is a fantastic movie. It's one of my biggest recommendations to my friends as well as other film viewers. It just has everything you could want: action, romance, alligators, and heart sacrifices, lol, OK, that sounded gross, just trust me this that this is such a fun movie. It's one of my favorite films, I know that sounds bad, but I just love this film. It's a lot of fun and Indiana and Short Round are just the best buddies to watch argue on screen. This is an awesome sequel, definitely a must see.
9/10
Prequel to "Raiders of the Lost Ark"
jhaggardjr24 March 2002
It's funny to call "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" a followup to "Raiders of the Lost Ark". This film is a prequel to the 1981 smash hit, a movie where the events that take place actually took place before the events in "Raiders". Notice at the beginning of "Raiders" that the year is 1936. In "Temple of Doom", the year is 1935. See what I mean? "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" is another rollercoaster ride of a movie brought to life by Steven Spielberg and George Lucas. Harrison Ford is back as archaeologist Indiana Jones who this time searches for a sacred stone that was stolen from an Indian village. Along for the ride is American singer/entertainer Willie Scott (Kate Capshaw, aka Mrs. Steven Spielberg) and little Chinese sidekick Short Round (Ke Huy Quan). On their way to finding the stone they stumble across a palace that leads to the gateway of the Temple of Doom run by an evil Thugee cult. The action and special effects are first-rate as you would expect, though the story is a tad weaker than it was in "Raiders". Plus, Capshaw's performance leaves something to be desired. She goes so far over-the-top in some scenes that you'd wish Karen Allen would show up as Marion. Nevertheless, Capshaw isn't all that bad. She does make an impression during the times when she's not screaming. But Ke Huy Quan (now known as Jonathan Ke Quan) comes off better as Indy's young sidekick. The following year he starred in the Spielberg produced Richard Donner directed "The Goonies", but then didn't appear in much after that. "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" is great fun only if you can get by Kate Capshaw's simpering wimpering character or the over-the-top violence. I found it to be exciting from beginning to end.
***1/2 (out of four)
POINT OF INTEREST: this was the film that lead to the creation of the PG-13 rating in 1984 (along with Spielberg's other 1984 movie "Gremlins"). Both "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" and "Gremlins" feature violence that most people felt was too strong for a PG rating, though the MPAA felt that it wasn't strong enough to merit an R rating (other Spielberg movies that got PG ratings that were quite intense were "Jaws", "Poltergeist", and the original "Raiders of the Lost Ark"). So after "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" and "Gremlins" opened in theaters at the beginning of the summer movie season of 1984 and became two of that year's biggest hits, the MPAA realized a new rating had to be created. The PG-13 rating was born. In August 1984, the first movies were released with the new PG-13 rating ("Red Dawn" and "The Woman in Red"). It's not a new rating anymore. The PG-13 rating has held up very well these last 18 years and it'll still go strong in the years to come. But I'll always remember "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" as the leading factor to the creation of the PG-13 rating.
***1/2 (out of four)
POINT OF INTEREST: this was the film that lead to the creation of the PG-13 rating in 1984 (along with Spielberg's other 1984 movie "Gremlins"). Both "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" and "Gremlins" feature violence that most people felt was too strong for a PG rating, though the MPAA felt that it wasn't strong enough to merit an R rating (other Spielberg movies that got PG ratings that were quite intense were "Jaws", "Poltergeist", and the original "Raiders of the Lost Ark"). So after "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" and "Gremlins" opened in theaters at the beginning of the summer movie season of 1984 and became two of that year's biggest hits, the MPAA realized a new rating had to be created. The PG-13 rating was born. In August 1984, the first movies were released with the new PG-13 rating ("Red Dawn" and "The Woman in Red"). It's not a new rating anymore. The PG-13 rating has held up very well these last 18 years and it'll still go strong in the years to come. But I'll always remember "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" as the leading factor to the creation of the PG-13 rating.
An entertaining experience, but unable to match the sheer brilliance of the original.
barnabyrudge9 September 2004
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom is the second of the Indy films from director Steven Spielberg, though chronologically it is actually the first. This prequel to Raiders of the Lost Ark tries to out-do its predecessor for breakneck spills and gross-out moments, but the sparkle isn't quite there. It's an entertaining film for sure, but not as good as the original, partially because the plotting this time round is a little awkward and partially because Kate Capshaw as the main female character is an almighty irritation.
The film opens in a Shanghai restaurant, where Indiana Jones (Harrison Ford) causes a riot in pursuit of a diamond. Fleeing the scene with American singer Willie Scott (Kate Capshaw) and teenaged pick-pocket Short Round (Ke Huy Quan), he escapes to the airport. However, Indy and his companions unwittingly board an airplane owned by one of Indy's enemies, from which they have to make an audacious mid-air escape when the real pilots bail out mid-flight! Soon, the intrepid trio find themselves in India, where they come across a village in the grip of starvation. The village children have been kidnapped by local cultists to work in a mine, digging for the sacred Sankara Stones, and Indy is persuaded by the distraught villagers to rescue their youngsters. His quest takes him to the opulent Pankot Palace and, beneath it and beyond a maze of tunnels, the Temple of Doom.
Ford is great as Jones, bringing genuine charisma to a role that he was born to play (can you imagine how things would have turned out if Tom Selleck had got the part, as originally planned?) There are some great moments along the way too, including the intentionally subversive opening sequence in Shanghai, a particularly funny and exciting runaway mine-train sequence, and an unforgettable banquet at Pankot Palace in which the food served up is enough to churn any stomach. But Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom still can't live up to the standard set by Raiders of the Lost Ark. As mentioned, Capshaw is a real pain on the senses as the always-squealing heroine, and the plot seems to over-stretch in an effort to link to the next development or set piece. The hunt-for-the-missing-children plot device allows Spielberg to dip into the kind of cloying sentimentality that occasionally mars his films too. This is certainly an entertaining and professionally assembled film, but in no way a rival or an equal to the excellence of its predecessor.
The film opens in a Shanghai restaurant, where Indiana Jones (Harrison Ford) causes a riot in pursuit of a diamond. Fleeing the scene with American singer Willie Scott (Kate Capshaw) and teenaged pick-pocket Short Round (Ke Huy Quan), he escapes to the airport. However, Indy and his companions unwittingly board an airplane owned by one of Indy's enemies, from which they have to make an audacious mid-air escape when the real pilots bail out mid-flight! Soon, the intrepid trio find themselves in India, where they come across a village in the grip of starvation. The village children have been kidnapped by local cultists to work in a mine, digging for the sacred Sankara Stones, and Indy is persuaded by the distraught villagers to rescue their youngsters. His quest takes him to the opulent Pankot Palace and, beneath it and beyond a maze of tunnels, the Temple of Doom.
Ford is great as Jones, bringing genuine charisma to a role that he was born to play (can you imagine how things would have turned out if Tom Selleck had got the part, as originally planned?) There are some great moments along the way too, including the intentionally subversive opening sequence in Shanghai, a particularly funny and exciting runaway mine-train sequence, and an unforgettable banquet at Pankot Palace in which the food served up is enough to churn any stomach. But Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom still can't live up to the standard set by Raiders of the Lost Ark. As mentioned, Capshaw is a real pain on the senses as the always-squealing heroine, and the plot seems to over-stretch in an effort to link to the next development or set piece. The hunt-for-the-missing-children plot device allows Spielberg to dip into the kind of cloying sentimentality that occasionally mars his films too. This is certainly an entertaining and professionally assembled film, but in no way a rival or an equal to the excellence of its predecessor.
One of the greatest adventure films of all time...
WhitePhantom8 April 2003
Everyone complains about Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. One of my friends and I used to argue for months on end about which Indian Jones film was the superior. Almost anyone we ask say that Temple of Doom is their least favorite, and the worst in the Jones trilogy. I believe the only reason people say this, is because it's the middle film, sandwiched between an all time classic, and a Hollywood blockbuster. To me, there is NO question that Raiders of the Lost Ark is the far superior Indiana Jones film. To anyone who says Last Crusade is the best I can do nothing but disagree (let me point out that all THREE films are nothing short of phenomenal). Temple of Doom had so much to live up to after the first film, and instead of trying to re-create Raiders (something I feel Crusade did), Lucas and Spielberg decided to take the franchise in a new direction. In my opinion, this was a great idea. Crusade and Raiders are too similar: both of them take place in desert terrain, both have Indy going after a very famous, biblical artifact, and both have Indy fighting off the Nazi's from attaining this object for global domination. Without Temple of Doom, Last Crusade would be an obvious copy of Raiders of the Lost Ark. A different style of Indy film is needed to expand the trilogy, making Indiana Jones a truly global character, and Temple of Doom did just that.
The film itself is a non-stop action, adventure ride. Harrison Ford is once again AMAZING as the dashing professor/archaeologist thrill seeker. Short Round is a loveable character who adds a humorous touch, and reveals the more compassionate side of Indy's character. The ceremony scenes are truly breathtaking and tense. During these scenes the film contains some very graphic images, but are used justifiably to convey the real dark, feel of this film (i.e. the removing of the man's heart while he's still alive, and lowering him into a fiery pit). The mine cart chase scenes are the most amazing, fast moving action sequence in any of the Indy films, and you feel like you're on a roller coaster each time you watch it. All these events lead to the film's spectacular and memorable climax.
I know with three films as amazing as the Indiana Jones trilogy, it's hard to pick a best and worst film, in fact it's nearly impossible. I'm just going to say that each film is great on it's own, and really shouldn't be compared to the other two.
The film itself is a non-stop action, adventure ride. Harrison Ford is once again AMAZING as the dashing professor/archaeologist thrill seeker. Short Round is a loveable character who adds a humorous touch, and reveals the more compassionate side of Indy's character. The ceremony scenes are truly breathtaking and tense. During these scenes the film contains some very graphic images, but are used justifiably to convey the real dark, feel of this film (i.e. the removing of the man's heart while he's still alive, and lowering him into a fiery pit). The mine cart chase scenes are the most amazing, fast moving action sequence in any of the Indy films, and you feel like you're on a roller coaster each time you watch it. All these events lead to the film's spectacular and memorable climax.
I know with three films as amazing as the Indiana Jones trilogy, it's hard to pick a best and worst film, in fact it's nearly impossible. I'm just going to say that each film is great on it's own, and really shouldn't be compared to the other two.
Spielberg/Lucas' (partly) misguided-guide to sheer cliffhanging, shamefully entertaining adventure-lore
Quinoa198413 April 2006
(re-Review): I've never disliked this movie, but it's also been a hard movie to love over time. I also never watched it as much as I can remember Raiders, or even Last Crusade (the latter I feel like was more of a TV thing, like on the USA network). I think the two main things that bog this down are a) I don't really care all that much about the quest for the stones - as far as MacGuffins go, these are some flimsy MacGuffins, which I almost forgot about midway through the movie, and b) Willie Scott is just a terribly written character.
Kate Capshaw, it should be said, isn't exactly BAD, per-say, but her character is so one-dimensional that she's not really given all that much interesting stuff to do except be the uber/quintessential Damsel-in-Distress, to the point (perhaps it was the idea?) of parody, or as some kind of ditzy sexual object. Her best scene is when she is going back and forth across the room, inter-cut with Jones talking to himself, about whether or not to leave the room or wait for the other to come to have 'mating rituals'. Oh, she CAN be annoying in her screaming and perpetual HELP ME-ness, and yet it's interesting that some people - not all, but some - are more annoyed by Short Round.
To put it into Star Wars terms, imagine, easily enough, that Jones is Han Solo (and of course, both are Ford). Short Round is basically one of the droids, doing whatever to help the hero in his quest. Willie, on the other hand, is no Leia, or even a goddamn Padme. It's a flatly written one-dimensional object to follow along Dr. Jones on this mission that, in the grand scheme of things with this series, is a bit superfluous.
Some backstory on the production can sometimes help; it was a dark time for Lucas as he was going through a divorce, and he poured I imagine a lot of that darkness into the depiction of these tribespeople doing their insane rituals involving torn-hearts and fires burned and so on underground. Certainly those moments where Jones is in 'evil' mode are scary - though how he just snaps out of it due to fire is just one of those 'things' you really have to suspend-to-disbelieve here. And on Spielberg's part, he's always there to work and make some craftsman-stuff, but his heart is really in a couple of the set- pieces, like the descending spikes from the ceiling in the trapped room, and of course the cart-chase.
That cart-chase is a piece of icon action cinema, and for good reason; it makes the movie into a literal interpretation of what it's trying to be, as a ROLLER COASTER ride. And like roller- coasters, they're fun, they're diverting, they may be scary, and once they're over you... don't get much substance from them. So Spielberg is there to work but not fully with his heart in it (one wonders what he thought of the script on first read, from future Howard the Duck scribes Hyuck and Katz), and Lucas in a mood that is bizarre and tonally strange. What to make of a movie that has such very dark turns, and the ends with the goofiest set piece of Jones chopping a bridge so that the nameless Indians fall to their deaths as hords of crocodiles are just there already waiting.
In other words, this is the most outlandish, CARTOONISH of the bunch. I'd almost like this more if it was an animated movie; ironically years later Spielberg would make The Adventures of Tintin, a kind of Indiana Jones with a kid as the hero, and that somehow is LESS cartoony than this movie with its scenes where everything is over the top. Again, it makes for a good ride, and Ford is always great as Indiana Jones - yes, even in Crystal Skull, which I don't think is as bad as has been made out to be - but it's memorable only for the ride aspect, not for its particular, shall we say, pathos.
Kate Capshaw, it should be said, isn't exactly BAD, per-say, but her character is so one-dimensional that she's not really given all that much interesting stuff to do except be the uber/quintessential Damsel-in-Distress, to the point (perhaps it was the idea?) of parody, or as some kind of ditzy sexual object. Her best scene is when she is going back and forth across the room, inter-cut with Jones talking to himself, about whether or not to leave the room or wait for the other to come to have 'mating rituals'. Oh, she CAN be annoying in her screaming and perpetual HELP ME-ness, and yet it's interesting that some people - not all, but some - are more annoyed by Short Round.
To put it into Star Wars terms, imagine, easily enough, that Jones is Han Solo (and of course, both are Ford). Short Round is basically one of the droids, doing whatever to help the hero in his quest. Willie, on the other hand, is no Leia, or even a goddamn Padme. It's a flatly written one-dimensional object to follow along Dr. Jones on this mission that, in the grand scheme of things with this series, is a bit superfluous.
Some backstory on the production can sometimes help; it was a dark time for Lucas as he was going through a divorce, and he poured I imagine a lot of that darkness into the depiction of these tribespeople doing their insane rituals involving torn-hearts and fires burned and so on underground. Certainly those moments where Jones is in 'evil' mode are scary - though how he just snaps out of it due to fire is just one of those 'things' you really have to suspend-to-disbelieve here. And on Spielberg's part, he's always there to work and make some craftsman-stuff, but his heart is really in a couple of the set- pieces, like the descending spikes from the ceiling in the trapped room, and of course the cart-chase.
That cart-chase is a piece of icon action cinema, and for good reason; it makes the movie into a literal interpretation of what it's trying to be, as a ROLLER COASTER ride. And like roller- coasters, they're fun, they're diverting, they may be scary, and once they're over you... don't get much substance from them. So Spielberg is there to work but not fully with his heart in it (one wonders what he thought of the script on first read, from future Howard the Duck scribes Hyuck and Katz), and Lucas in a mood that is bizarre and tonally strange. What to make of a movie that has such very dark turns, and the ends with the goofiest set piece of Jones chopping a bridge so that the nameless Indians fall to their deaths as hords of crocodiles are just there already waiting.
In other words, this is the most outlandish, CARTOONISH of the bunch. I'd almost like this more if it was an animated movie; ironically years later Spielberg would make The Adventures of Tintin, a kind of Indiana Jones with a kid as the hero, and that somehow is LESS cartoony than this movie with its scenes where everything is over the top. Again, it makes for a good ride, and Ford is always great as Indiana Jones - yes, even in Crystal Skull, which I don't think is as bad as has been made out to be - but it's memorable only for the ride aspect, not for its particular, shall we say, pathos.
"Hey, Dr. Jones, no time for love. We've got company."
ryan_kuhn2 October 2006
After the success of Raiders of the Lost Ark, the sequel was inevitable. George Lucas came up with the story and Steven Spielberg again directed this second adventure in the Indiana Jones serial. The high energy and joy seen in Raiders of the Lost Ark has been replaced with a darker, more serious adventure, as Indiana is charged with recovering a magic stone for a village in India who has seen drought and all of the children have gone missing. The beginning of the movie is the high point of the film, with an extravagant musical number in club Obi Wan (oh, that George Lucas and his inside Star Wars jokes), a Shanghai night club where Indiana is closing a deal over artifacts from the Chinese dynasty. Kate Capshaw is the featured singer and the latest "Indiana girl" in this film, a movie that, curiously enough, occurs BEFORE Raiders of the Lost Ark, so the suspense of Jones' fate (if there really was any) is removed, and so any potential love affairs that fail to carry over between movies. Also missing is John Rhys-Davies' Sallah and Deholm Elliot's Brody, instead, we get to see Indy's child helper, Short Round, who's job is to go into tight quarters and say "Doctor Jones" about 300 times. The plot is complicated, as I had to watch the movie a couple of times to get an idea of was actually happening, and, unlike the previous film, most of the movie happens in one place. The famous scene in this movie is the dinner at the palace, where the visitors are treated to chilled monkey brains and other appealing meals. The movie does feature a fantastic scene with an underground rail system that turns into a chase sequence that is filmed well and is enjoyable to watch. This film does not have the whimsy or innocence seen in the other two Indiana movies, and suffers because of it. While still an enjoyable film, it is the least of the three Indiana movies.
A character in search of a story.
Anaisnine3 December 2011
You are Steve Spielberg and George Lucas. You have created one of the best made films of all time. You have created a box office bonanza. You have created one of the most iconic movie characters of all time.
What do you do? How do you follow it up? All too often we see filmmakers fall into the deadly sequel trap, this trap of course being "take the elements and scenes the public really responded to in the first film, and ramp it up to 11"
Invariably, this approach always fails. Why does it always fail? Because this strategy is often pursued at the expense of the most important element of all- character development and a coherent story, which are the elements that made the original as successful as it was in the first place.
From the first scene of Raiders the character of Indy is carefully unfolded before us- he is a man who is driven, resourceful, intelligent, and not afraid of a good fight. But he is also has his weak spots( fear of snakes, which isn't even a weak spot because it enhances his character by showing he has some vulnerabilities) and can be a bad judge of character( the underling who double crosses him in the first 10 min of Raiders). These elements are developed and built upon as the story unfolds.
As for the story, again it is laid out carefully. We have Indiana's rivalry with Belloq who is Indiana's cynical foil, his willingness to fight against evil by seeking the Ark to foil the Nazis, his past relationship with Marion, and the unveiling mystery surrounding the ark. All of this is done in a balanced and measured way.
The characterization of Indiana and the other major characters is balanced with the telling of the story. Do we learn all of the backstory for each major character? No, but we learn enough about them to make them fully fleshed and compelling. Belloq is amoral and greedy, but like Jones he does have a love for knowledge and values artifacts, also he does at least feel human compassion for Marion- a tough nut, a woman who can fight her own battles and as the movies goes on you can see why a man like Indy fell for her. Sallah is a loyal friend to Indy with whom we can infer he has had some previous adventures.
Raiders was a great balance of characterization, story, plot, great action sequences, amazing FX and an iconic score. All combining to make one of the best movies of all time.
Sadly, Temple sacrificed the characterization and plot and just decides to make this simple one big action sequence with some gross out sequences to pander to the kids- Temple really went of the way to pander to the child audience( the character of short round, the plot of kids needing to be rescued, gross out moments etc). Was this an attempt to increase merchandising sales? I do not know. Even more disturbing, Indy's "love interest" this time around is more a caricature of the damsel in distress rather than a fully fleshed out character. We are not given insight into the motivations or desires of the villains other than they are Eeeeeevell. In the other words, the villains are just stock wooden characters there to be defeated by Indiana. Granted, its hard to create a better villain than Nazis, but at least Belloq had some charm and style.
But the most disappointing aspect of this sequel is..we don't learn anything new about Indiana. How did he become the man we saw in Raiders? Given that the film is set a year before the events of Raiders, it was a perfect opportunity to show some of the events that lead to Henry Jones jr becoming Indiana Jones. But in this film, we are given nothing to add to the aura or mystique of Jones, nothing to illuminate other facets of his character or his relationships that existed by the beginning of Raiders.
Some said the movie failed because it was too dark, or too violent or too gross and too much action. The movie failed because despite having a fantastic character to base the movie upon, it failed to tell the story of that character.
What do you do? How do you follow it up? All too often we see filmmakers fall into the deadly sequel trap, this trap of course being "take the elements and scenes the public really responded to in the first film, and ramp it up to 11"
Invariably, this approach always fails. Why does it always fail? Because this strategy is often pursued at the expense of the most important element of all- character development and a coherent story, which are the elements that made the original as successful as it was in the first place.
From the first scene of Raiders the character of Indy is carefully unfolded before us- he is a man who is driven, resourceful, intelligent, and not afraid of a good fight. But he is also has his weak spots( fear of snakes, which isn't even a weak spot because it enhances his character by showing he has some vulnerabilities) and can be a bad judge of character( the underling who double crosses him in the first 10 min of Raiders). These elements are developed and built upon as the story unfolds.
As for the story, again it is laid out carefully. We have Indiana's rivalry with Belloq who is Indiana's cynical foil, his willingness to fight against evil by seeking the Ark to foil the Nazis, his past relationship with Marion, and the unveiling mystery surrounding the ark. All of this is done in a balanced and measured way.
The characterization of Indiana and the other major characters is balanced with the telling of the story. Do we learn all of the backstory for each major character? No, but we learn enough about them to make them fully fleshed and compelling. Belloq is amoral and greedy, but like Jones he does have a love for knowledge and values artifacts, also he does at least feel human compassion for Marion- a tough nut, a woman who can fight her own battles and as the movies goes on you can see why a man like Indy fell for her. Sallah is a loyal friend to Indy with whom we can infer he has had some previous adventures.
Raiders was a great balance of characterization, story, plot, great action sequences, amazing FX and an iconic score. All combining to make one of the best movies of all time.
Sadly, Temple sacrificed the characterization and plot and just decides to make this simple one big action sequence with some gross out sequences to pander to the kids- Temple really went of the way to pander to the child audience( the character of short round, the plot of kids needing to be rescued, gross out moments etc). Was this an attempt to increase merchandising sales? I do not know. Even more disturbing, Indy's "love interest" this time around is more a caricature of the damsel in distress rather than a fully fleshed out character. We are not given insight into the motivations or desires of the villains other than they are Eeeeeevell. In the other words, the villains are just stock wooden characters there to be defeated by Indiana. Granted, its hard to create a better villain than Nazis, but at least Belloq had some charm and style.
But the most disappointing aspect of this sequel is..we don't learn anything new about Indiana. How did he become the man we saw in Raiders? Given that the film is set a year before the events of Raiders, it was a perfect opportunity to show some of the events that lead to Henry Jones jr becoming Indiana Jones. But in this film, we are given nothing to add to the aura or mystique of Jones, nothing to illuminate other facets of his character or his relationships that existed by the beginning of Raiders.
Some said the movie failed because it was too dark, or too violent or too gross and too much action. The movie failed because despite having a fantastic character to base the movie upon, it failed to tell the story of that character.
Cartoonish and silly
WatchingWendy23 July 2023
The first Indiana Jones movie was an instant classic. A good premise as to why IJ would be going after the Arc. Clever, campy, funny, with a bit of fantasy. Well balanced and clever ending. This Temple of Doom sequel is just stupid. Bad effects, dumb story, ridiculous situations. So heavy handed and corny - I can't believe Spielberg did this movie. Was this considered good in the 80's? Since Spielberg met his future wife on this shoot, maybe he was too distracted to do a good movie. Don't bother watching this one. Maybe some of the other Indians Jones sequels are better- but this is one is just dumb.
Why is this one the darkhorse?
bat-57 May 1999
Temple of Doom may not be as good as Raiders, but it doesn't deserve all this negative flak. The story is a little darker but that doesn't take anything away from the film. It makes the situation that much more dire. John Williams' score infuses the sacrifice sequence with a sense of building dread. The chanting, the heavy drums all building into a wild climax of heart burning and lava filled mayhem. The mine car chase is wild fun and Indy's bridge manuver is one hell of a climax. Still don't know why everyone's so down on this movie.
Changed My Mind About This Stylish Film
ccthemovieman-15 April 2006
For a long time, this was the only one of the three Indiana Jones films I did not like. Then, when it was part of the DVD package that came out over five years ago, I had to buy it if I wanted the other two, so I gave it a third look. Wow, all of sudden I liked it.
For the first time, the woman (Kate Capshaw) and the young boy (Ke Huy Quan) weren't as annoying as I had remembered them. The stupid kid really had rubbed me the wrong way, but this time only Kate was annoying....and she was fine once she calmed down and got rid of the hysterics.
The action in this film is mostly at the beginning and at the end. It is so Rambo-ish (bad guys never hit the target but good guys always do) it is ludicrous. It also has dumb dialog in a number of spots, paying homage to voodooism, spells and other nonsense.
Yet, despite these criticisms, it's entertaining start-to-finish and has some fantastic visuals. The photography in here is beautiful: the best of the three Jones adventures. I particularly liked the opening dance number which reminded me of a Busby Berkeley extravaganza. This whole film looks spectacular on DVD.
For the first time, the woman (Kate Capshaw) and the young boy (Ke Huy Quan) weren't as annoying as I had remembered them. The stupid kid really had rubbed me the wrong way, but this time only Kate was annoying....and she was fine once she calmed down and got rid of the hysterics.
The action in this film is mostly at the beginning and at the end. It is so Rambo-ish (bad guys never hit the target but good guys always do) it is ludicrous. It also has dumb dialog in a number of spots, paying homage to voodooism, spells and other nonsense.
Yet, despite these criticisms, it's entertaining start-to-finish and has some fantastic visuals. The photography in here is beautiful: the best of the three Jones adventures. I particularly liked the opening dance number which reminded me of a Busby Berkeley extravaganza. This whole film looks spectacular on DVD.
Thrilling action-packed and third adventure movie with Harrison Ford as the intrepid archeologist
ma-cortes5 September 2005
The adventurer and archaeologist Indiana Jones (Harrison Ford) with his bullwhip wielding and hat will fight against nasty enemies in India along with an oriental little boy (Jonathan Ke Quan) and a night club Singer (Kate Capshaw who married Steven Spielberg). Jones agrees with the village's inhabitants look for a lost magic stone. Meanwhile , they stumble with a secret thug cult ruled by an evil priest (Amrish Puri).
The Indiana Jones adventures trilogy tries to continue the vintage pathes from the thirty years ago greatest classics , and the comics-books narrative , along with the special characteristics of the horror films of the 80s decade , as it is well reflected in the creepy and spooky scenes about human sacrifices . The picture is directed with great style and high adventure and driven along with enormous fair-play in the stunning mounted action set-pieces . Harrison Ford plays splendidly the valiant and brave archaeologist turned into an action man .Kate Capshaw interprets a scream girl who'll have a little romance with Indy . The movie blends adventures , noisy action , rip-snorting , humor , tongue-in-chek , it is a cinematic roller coaster ride and pretty bemusing . The motion picture has great loads of action , special effects galore and the usual and magnificent John Williams musical score . The glimmering and dazzling cinematography is efficiently realized by Douglas Slocombe . The pic was allrightly directed by Steven Spielberg. Film culminates in a spectacular finale that will have you on the edge of your seat . It's a must see for adventures aficionados , as perfect entertainment for all the family .
The Indiana Jones adventures trilogy tries to continue the vintage pathes from the thirty years ago greatest classics , and the comics-books narrative , along with the special characteristics of the horror films of the 80s decade , as it is well reflected in the creepy and spooky scenes about human sacrifices . The picture is directed with great style and high adventure and driven along with enormous fair-play in the stunning mounted action set-pieces . Harrison Ford plays splendidly the valiant and brave archaeologist turned into an action man .Kate Capshaw interprets a scream girl who'll have a little romance with Indy . The movie blends adventures , noisy action , rip-snorting , humor , tongue-in-chek , it is a cinematic roller coaster ride and pretty bemusing . The motion picture has great loads of action , special effects galore and the usual and magnificent John Williams musical score . The glimmering and dazzling cinematography is efficiently realized by Douglas Slocombe . The pic was allrightly directed by Steven Spielberg. Film culminates in a spectacular finale that will have you on the edge of your seat . It's a must see for adventures aficionados , as perfect entertainment for all the family .
This is a great movie
jmaycock25 May 2002
I can't understand how this movie is rated so low? This is an absolutely fantastic movie. The best in the trilogy. Of course everybody always rates the first movie in a trilogy the best - like Godfather I and Star Wars(the original 1977 movie), but clearly the films that followed them were better, as is the case with this one. I saw this film about 20 times as a kid and have recently watched all 3 movies again, enjoying this one the best. It has some great action sequences in it, notably the roller coaster ride through the mine, some great laughs, and romance. What more could a movie offer?
Does everything you expect an Indiana Jones film to do, but can't live up to the first film
stephendaxter12 March 2015
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom is the second instalment of the Indiana Jones franchise and the prequel, yes, prequel to the first film. The decision to go for a prequel was an interesting one but didn't affect the film at all as it was a different quest to the first film. That aside, for me this film was very disappointing compared to what the first film accomplished. This felt like it was missing a lot of the elements that the first film managed to use so well. Yes this film did have some comedic moments but not as many as the first film and it did have a little more darker horror like scenes, but i felt that this was missing a lot of the awesome action/adventure sequences that made the first film so iconic. This film failed to deliver in that sense, there was some interesting action sequences but i didn't feel that the adventure was there, and i was pretty disappointed. The plot itself was at times pretty interesting and i was invested in what was going on and at times it dragged on and got predictable. I did like the opening, it had the comedy, action and mystery that i loved from the first Indiana Jones. But following their arrival in India they quickly setup the quest they had to go on but then spent quite a bit of time in the village and on the way to their destination, and it wasn't all that interesting. Similarly later on when the mystery gets revealed, it spends a lot of time inside this location that did not feel like Indiana Jones at all. It was a different environment that i was used to seeing him in and it really wasn't too interesting, some of the action was good though.
Harrison Ford still did a really good job as Indiana Jones and he was not the problem with this movie. I was not a huge fan of the supporting cast, Jonathan Ke Quan as Short Round was decent, his character was there to play as a sort of sidekick to Indiana and was a pretty likable kid. But, i really didn't like Kate Capshaw as Willie Scott, it was more the character that i didn't enjoy watching because i felt like she really didn't belong, if we had Short Round in the film for some comedic relief, i don't see why we needed Willie, i believe she was just there because the plot later on required her to be. John Williams again did a great job with the score but didn't live up to the first. And that really is the best way to describe this whole film, it did a decent to good job in all the categories but unfortunately fell really short of what the first film accomplished. - 6.8
Harrison Ford still did a really good job as Indiana Jones and he was not the problem with this movie. I was not a huge fan of the supporting cast, Jonathan Ke Quan as Short Round was decent, his character was there to play as a sort of sidekick to Indiana and was a pretty likable kid. But, i really didn't like Kate Capshaw as Willie Scott, it was more the character that i didn't enjoy watching because i felt like she really didn't belong, if we had Short Round in the film for some comedic relief, i don't see why we needed Willie, i believe she was just there because the plot later on required her to be. John Williams again did a great job with the score but didn't live up to the first. And that really is the best way to describe this whole film, it did a decent to good job in all the categories but unfortunately fell really short of what the first film accomplished. - 6.8
Asks a for a bit too much suspension of disbelief
wizzballs28 July 2007
An improvement on Raiders? Don't make me laugh. The over the top feel, the corny dialogue, the kiddy focus, the lack of dramatic context for the action and the weak and superficial attempt at mythology are all forgivable in a movie such as this.
What is harder to take is the appalling disrespect shown to Indian culture. As one reviewer here has noted, all Indians in this film are either demonic (i.e. soulless) bad guys or waiting for a westerner to save them. The only other use Spielberg finds Indian culture serves is to disgust us with entirely fabricated depictions of people eating monkey brains and beetles.
Kate Capshaw's character also deserves singling out, it seems that the only purpose women serve in this film is to be mothers to children (the women in the village), to complain when they break a nail, but mostly, to scream very loudly, and engage in sexual banter with the lead.
But hey, all of these are peripheral issues for what is an action movie.
What really bites is just how slipshod some of the direction, but especially the editing of some key action scenes were. The fight to save KC from being dropped into the lava makes absolutely no sense. If we look at it, Short-round in one cut must dispose of about 6 massive bad-guys AND wedge the pulley to account for what we are shown next. But we see NONE of this. We have to imagine it for ourselves, which is asking a lot, if you are over 10.
This kind of slipshod editing/direction occurs several times during the movie, and is really the reason why people say this movie is inferior to Raiders, and Last Crusade. It has nothing to do with any 'darker' feel to this picture compared to Raiders, which is something I personally just don't recognise. It's the quality of the action, editing and continuity that made Raiders in particular such a special action film. We can suspend our disbelief in many ways, but, if the action doesn't hold together cinematically (let alone create an illusion of material realism), the film fails.
Also to many modern eyes, some of the special (even basic ones) effects will appear remarkably crude, even accounting for the fact the film was made 25 odd years ago.
Luckily the film provides us at least one magic moment that reminds us what good action movies are all about. The chase on the mine cart is a simple idea that is brilliantly edited, humorous and exciting, and satisfying in almost every way an action sequence can be.
There are many other good moments in this film too, but this is the only one that isn't in some way spoilt by any of the reservations people have about this movie.
What is harder to take is the appalling disrespect shown to Indian culture. As one reviewer here has noted, all Indians in this film are either demonic (i.e. soulless) bad guys or waiting for a westerner to save them. The only other use Spielberg finds Indian culture serves is to disgust us with entirely fabricated depictions of people eating monkey brains and beetles.
Kate Capshaw's character also deserves singling out, it seems that the only purpose women serve in this film is to be mothers to children (the women in the village), to complain when they break a nail, but mostly, to scream very loudly, and engage in sexual banter with the lead.
But hey, all of these are peripheral issues for what is an action movie.
What really bites is just how slipshod some of the direction, but especially the editing of some key action scenes were. The fight to save KC from being dropped into the lava makes absolutely no sense. If we look at it, Short-round in one cut must dispose of about 6 massive bad-guys AND wedge the pulley to account for what we are shown next. But we see NONE of this. We have to imagine it for ourselves, which is asking a lot, if you are over 10.
This kind of slipshod editing/direction occurs several times during the movie, and is really the reason why people say this movie is inferior to Raiders, and Last Crusade. It has nothing to do with any 'darker' feel to this picture compared to Raiders, which is something I personally just don't recognise. It's the quality of the action, editing and continuity that made Raiders in particular such a special action film. We can suspend our disbelief in many ways, but, if the action doesn't hold together cinematically (let alone create an illusion of material realism), the film fails.
Also to many modern eyes, some of the special (even basic ones) effects will appear remarkably crude, even accounting for the fact the film was made 25 odd years ago.
Luckily the film provides us at least one magic moment that reminds us what good action movies are all about. The chase on the mine cart is a simple idea that is brilliantly edited, humorous and exciting, and satisfying in almost every way an action sequence can be.
There are many other good moments in this film too, but this is the only one that isn't in some way spoilt by any of the reservations people have about this movie.
One of Spielberg's worst!
saip_pun31 July 2021
Not sure what Spielberg and Lucas smoked while they filmed this, by far the most nonsensical of Hollywood movies. Chinese cuisine is shown as Indian cuisine :), ageing actress with no depth, shorty steals the show, everything seemed out of place. Watch it at your own risk.
If Classic Has A Name, It's Temple Of Doom
MovieMaster9510 October 2010
An underrated gem of the 80's, An adventure not to be missed and indescribably classic in every sense of the word. I'm a huge fan of the Indiana Jones franchise and unlike most fans, consider Temple of Doom to be my favourite of the series and one of my favourite films.
Set one year before Raiders(In 1935), Temple of Doom's plot doesn't revolve around the Nazis and takes a darker root. This time Indiana teams up with a club singer named Willie and ten year old, Asian boy named Short Round. After a treasure deal goes wrong the three escape in a plane which turns out to be a trap, causing them to do a death defying escape which ends up in India. When the village people their warn them of the mysterious temple and the horrible loss of their children, the three set off to discover the temple. The plot just gets darker and more action packed from there.
Harrison Ford returns in his signature role as Indina Jones and is still the tough as nails archaeologist he was in Raiders. Short Round is a lovable and has great chemistry with Indy, and during the film he becomes one of the most memorable sidekicks ever. Willie, is a typical damsel in distress, who spends the movie screaming and moaning, but this is just a throwback to the 'B' movies, the Indiana Jones films are inspired by.
From start to finish the film is filled with tons of memorable moments, classic set-pieces and amazing stunt and camera work. With a snow ball pacing that gradually gets bigger and better as it goes along, the movie is pretty much impossible not to enjoy. The score is one of the best I've heard in a film a mixed with the creative and memorable camera work, just makes the film even better and gives me chills every time.
I can't stress this enough, but Temple of Doom is a must see for any fan of film. Some say it's too dark (Heart Scene)and the sillier moments ruined it(Dinner Scene), but the experience for me was never spoilt and the dark moments just made it better. With a bigger 'B' movie feel, great action, amazing set-pieces and effects and timeless feel the film gets my highest recommendation. Not to be missed!
Set one year before Raiders(In 1935), Temple of Doom's plot doesn't revolve around the Nazis and takes a darker root. This time Indiana teams up with a club singer named Willie and ten year old, Asian boy named Short Round. After a treasure deal goes wrong the three escape in a plane which turns out to be a trap, causing them to do a death defying escape which ends up in India. When the village people their warn them of the mysterious temple and the horrible loss of their children, the three set off to discover the temple. The plot just gets darker and more action packed from there.
Harrison Ford returns in his signature role as Indina Jones and is still the tough as nails archaeologist he was in Raiders. Short Round is a lovable and has great chemistry with Indy, and during the film he becomes one of the most memorable sidekicks ever. Willie, is a typical damsel in distress, who spends the movie screaming and moaning, but this is just a throwback to the 'B' movies, the Indiana Jones films are inspired by.
From start to finish the film is filled with tons of memorable moments, classic set-pieces and amazing stunt and camera work. With a snow ball pacing that gradually gets bigger and better as it goes along, the movie is pretty much impossible not to enjoy. The score is one of the best I've heard in a film a mixed with the creative and memorable camera work, just makes the film even better and gives me chills every time.
I can't stress this enough, but Temple of Doom is a must see for any fan of film. Some say it's too dark (Heart Scene)and the sillier moments ruined it(Dinner Scene), but the experience for me was never spoilt and the dark moments just made it better. With a bigger 'B' movie feel, great action, amazing set-pieces and effects and timeless feel the film gets my highest recommendation. Not to be missed!
Not as Good as "Raiders" or "Crusade," but Still a Great Adventure Film
carologletree16 January 2016
This film has often gotten a bad rap, especially around the time of its release. People have criticized this film for being too dark, violent, and disgusting. This may not be as good as the two films it is sandwiched in between, but it is still a lot of fun and another great Indiana Jones adventure.
The problem, of course, is that some scenes are way too violent and disturbing. This makes the movie not quite fit for little children. Another thing, Willie really can grate on your nerves at times with her constant whining and screaming.
However, the movie makes up for that in many other ways. Harrison Ford is still phenomenal as everyone's favorite adventure hero. Short Round is an adorable side-kick to Indy, and to be fair, Willie wasn't quite as annoying in the second half of the movie.
Unlike some people, I actually quite enjoyed the dark tone of the movie. The story was pretty cool, with Indy looking to find the Sankara stones and save the people of the village's children.
The action scenes once again deliver. The chase out in Shanghai is exciting, as is when the gang makes it out of the plane and ride in a raft. The mine cart chase was relentless; it was like being on a roller-coaster ride. The bridge scene was also filled with great tension.
The scenery in India is really nice and we once again get a rousing music score.
This is another classic Indiana Jones adventure. This may be the weakest of the original trilogy, but it's still way better than the fourth film.
RATING: A-
The problem, of course, is that some scenes are way too violent and disturbing. This makes the movie not quite fit for little children. Another thing, Willie really can grate on your nerves at times with her constant whining and screaming.
However, the movie makes up for that in many other ways. Harrison Ford is still phenomenal as everyone's favorite adventure hero. Short Round is an adorable side-kick to Indy, and to be fair, Willie wasn't quite as annoying in the second half of the movie.
Unlike some people, I actually quite enjoyed the dark tone of the movie. The story was pretty cool, with Indy looking to find the Sankara stones and save the people of the village's children.
The action scenes once again deliver. The chase out in Shanghai is exciting, as is when the gang makes it out of the plane and ride in a raft. The mine cart chase was relentless; it was like being on a roller-coaster ride. The bridge scene was also filled with great tension.
The scenery in India is really nice and we once again get a rousing music score.
This is another classic Indiana Jones adventure. This may be the weakest of the original trilogy, but it's still way better than the fourth film.
RATING: A-
indiana jones and the temple of doom
auuwws9 June 2021
An excellent movie, not on par with the first and third parts, but it's still an excellent movie. The Chinese kid character was fun at first, but as the movie went on, he became a very annoying character. The blonde girl character was annoying at first, but as the movie went on I liked it and she was the funniest character in the movie. The Indiana Jones character was just as great as the rest of the trilogy, the enemies of the movie weren't quite on the same level as the enemies of the first part, but they served a purpose.
A Great Prequel That Helped Create A Rating
jeremycrimsonfox28 February 2019
Some people say Indiana Jones And The Temple Of Doom is the worst movie of the franchise so far. To me, the worst is basically Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull. This movie is not perfect, but it's still good.
Set before the events of Raiders Of The Lost Ark, Indiana Jones is tasked by a village to help them after he escapes a Triad group after a deal gone wrong. Joined by singer Willie and young sidekick Short Round, Indy goes to Pankot Palace, where he discovers a hidden temple where a Thuggee cult, led by Mola Ram, has the stones the village asked him to return, and has even enslaved the kids of said village to mine for the last two.
Yeah, this movie is very violent, as it has some scenes that at the time, would be so brutal, some parents complained the movie should have been rated R. This, alongside the outrage of how violent first Gremlins movie was, would influence Steven Spielberg, who was involved with both movies, to suggest the PG-13 rating as an in-between rating. Also, the film is controversial for how it portrayed the country of India, causing the film to be banned from the country temporarily.
Despite those controversies, the film is interesting. It has the same exciting action as the first movie (like the famous mine cart chase scene), and even some goofy moments, making Temple of Doom one of my favorite films.
Set before the events of Raiders Of The Lost Ark, Indiana Jones is tasked by a village to help them after he escapes a Triad group after a deal gone wrong. Joined by singer Willie and young sidekick Short Round, Indy goes to Pankot Palace, where he discovers a hidden temple where a Thuggee cult, led by Mola Ram, has the stones the village asked him to return, and has even enslaved the kids of said village to mine for the last two.
Yeah, this movie is very violent, as it has some scenes that at the time, would be so brutal, some parents complained the movie should have been rated R. This, alongside the outrage of how violent first Gremlins movie was, would influence Steven Spielberg, who was involved with both movies, to suggest the PG-13 rating as an in-between rating. Also, the film is controversial for how it portrayed the country of India, causing the film to be banned from the country temporarily.
Despite those controversies, the film is interesting. It has the same exciting action as the first movie (like the famous mine cart chase scene), and even some goofy moments, making Temple of Doom one of my favorite films.
Is it that Good?
christophershobris10 November 2018
Of all the Steven Spielberg films this is to me by far the weirdest one he's ever done. But does weird equal good? Well, let's get this out of the way...their is no logic in this film, so you can just throw that out the window. People thought Crystal Skull was unrealistic (?)...think again. Spielberg lets us know pretty much right out of the gate what kind of movie we're dealing with here. George Lucas (the storywriter) went in such a humorous direction with the story it almost came across as a comedy. With the more comedic approach this made the film very unique in the feeling of it compared to Raiders of the Lost Ark which was darker and more serious, and The Last Crusade which borrows a lot of the elements from Raiders to give it a similar tone and feel to it. Indiana Jones himself is written in a more comedic way, almost to the point where you can't take him seriously, but not quite, Harrison Ford makes the characters balanced and doesn't make Indy come across as cartoony. As for the supporting characters...oh my god. These supporting characters make me want to pull my hair out. Willie played by Kate Capshaw is such a major step down from Marion. Yes, she was a damsel in distress, but she was a badass while she was. Here, she is over-the-top just for the sake of it. I don't blame Capshaw because she's just acting the way the director tells her to so, Spielberg, what the heck? You given us such beautiful characters like E.T. and Elliott. Then you give us this. Why? Then there is Short Round. Look, I understand there is a lot of people who like this character but...I just can't. His voice is like nails on a chalkboard, the actor who portrays him just isn't a good actor. He's definitely more important than Willie and isn't excruciatingly annoying but he does get under my skin. I know it seems I'm bashing the film more than I intended to. What do I like about this film? The villain. Unlike Willie, he is over-the-top in all the right ways. Roshan Seth does a great job with his character he makes this film enjoyable. The other thing, Harrison Ford's performance, like I said before, he gives a rather complex performance as Indy compared to Raiders. And lastly, the mine cart chase scene, beautifully choreographed, masterfully suspenseful, and downright entertaining. These three things gives this film a solid 7/10. Nowhere near as bad as Crystal, but comfortably falls in third place behind Raiders and Crusade for me. So is this film really that good? It's good, but not great.
"Doom" is about right.
dr_foreman28 December 2006
This is a shockingly bad movie. I can't for the life of me understand why it has earned over a 7.0 rating on IMDb and a club of supporters on the Internet. Nostalgia, perhaps?
I enjoy "Raiders of the Lost Ark," even though I find it to be a little politically incorrect and overrated. "The Temple of Doom," on the other hand, is downright atrocious, mightily racist and even a tad sexist. Apparently the movie was banned in India, and I can understand why, since it depicts Indians as miserably poor, superstitious, knife-waving, monkey-brain-eating lunatics.
The really sad part is that the movie stinks even if you manage to ignore the racism. It's chock full of disgusting moments, like the beetle-eating scene and the part where about a hundred bugs crawl all over Kate Capshaw. It simply pushes the gross envelope too far.
Even the never-ending action scenes are lacking. They're okay, I guess, but there's quite a lot of unconvincing blue screen work, and the big flood segment doesn't work because water doesn't "miniaturize" well. As if the special effects weren't bad enough in themselves, they're complimented by an obnoxious soundtrack, including some unusually bombastic John Williams music and Capshaw's relentless screaming.
You know, she really is a terrible heroine - annoying and painfully unfunny. A beautiful woman, sure, but irksome as all get-out. It's very surprising (in a bad way) to see such a lame female character in Indiana Jones after the series started off with Karen Allen's excellent performance as the (relatively) tough Marion Ravenwood.
Capshaw would be quite bad enough by herself, but compounding the casting problem there's Ke Huy Quan as Short Round, Indy's pointless kid sidekick. Whenever there's a stupid bit of slapstick comedy in the movie, Short Round helpfully cries, "Very funny! Very funny!" Which is code for painfully unfunny, of course.
Weirdly enough, Capshaw (whose character is called Willie, for goodness' sake!) and Short Round are really the only characters - the villains are completely faceless. There's a very bizarre segment when Indy puts on his scholarly glasses and has dinner with some people who I guess might qualify as characters, but the scene just doesn't fit with the rest of the movie, and never for a moment does the dialogue feel "real." So, in the absence of strong characters, the movie just sort of drunkenly reels from fight to fight.
I have one last observation. At one moment, Indy is waiting in his bedroom, expecting Capshaw to come in and have sex with him (he's too proud to go to her bedroom). The strange part about this set-up is that Short Round is in Indy's bedroom. Soooo...I guess Indy is expecting to have sex in front of Short Round? Isn't that a little strange? Well, maybe not; I guess the kid has to learn sometime. But maybe Indy should just go to her room, huh?
Sloppy scenes like that are a sure indication that Spielburg, Lucas and co. were really having an off day when they made this. Terrible, terrible, terrible.
I enjoy "Raiders of the Lost Ark," even though I find it to be a little politically incorrect and overrated. "The Temple of Doom," on the other hand, is downright atrocious, mightily racist and even a tad sexist. Apparently the movie was banned in India, and I can understand why, since it depicts Indians as miserably poor, superstitious, knife-waving, monkey-brain-eating lunatics.
The really sad part is that the movie stinks even if you manage to ignore the racism. It's chock full of disgusting moments, like the beetle-eating scene and the part where about a hundred bugs crawl all over Kate Capshaw. It simply pushes the gross envelope too far.
Even the never-ending action scenes are lacking. They're okay, I guess, but there's quite a lot of unconvincing blue screen work, and the big flood segment doesn't work because water doesn't "miniaturize" well. As if the special effects weren't bad enough in themselves, they're complimented by an obnoxious soundtrack, including some unusually bombastic John Williams music and Capshaw's relentless screaming.
You know, she really is a terrible heroine - annoying and painfully unfunny. A beautiful woman, sure, but irksome as all get-out. It's very surprising (in a bad way) to see such a lame female character in Indiana Jones after the series started off with Karen Allen's excellent performance as the (relatively) tough Marion Ravenwood.
Capshaw would be quite bad enough by herself, but compounding the casting problem there's Ke Huy Quan as Short Round, Indy's pointless kid sidekick. Whenever there's a stupid bit of slapstick comedy in the movie, Short Round helpfully cries, "Very funny! Very funny!" Which is code for painfully unfunny, of course.
Weirdly enough, Capshaw (whose character is called Willie, for goodness' sake!) and Short Round are really the only characters - the villains are completely faceless. There's a very bizarre segment when Indy puts on his scholarly glasses and has dinner with some people who I guess might qualify as characters, but the scene just doesn't fit with the rest of the movie, and never for a moment does the dialogue feel "real." So, in the absence of strong characters, the movie just sort of drunkenly reels from fight to fight.
I have one last observation. At one moment, Indy is waiting in his bedroom, expecting Capshaw to come in and have sex with him (he's too proud to go to her bedroom). The strange part about this set-up is that Short Round is in Indy's bedroom. Soooo...I guess Indy is expecting to have sex in front of Short Round? Isn't that a little strange? Well, maybe not; I guess the kid has to learn sometime. But maybe Indy should just go to her room, huh?
Sloppy scenes like that are a sure indication that Spielburg, Lucas and co. were really having an off day when they made this. Terrible, terrible, terrible.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
