I recently watched Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom and, compared to the other two, it was awful.
The first one was fun. The third one was, I think, a masterpiece of the action genre. The second one blew chunks. It tried to gross out the viewer, had inane dialogue, and was frankly . . . unrealistic.
Of course, the other two were rather unrealistic as well, but the second one seemed so contrived.
Any ideas?
I blame the Kate Capshaw character for most of it, and the little kid side-kick for part of the rest.
In the the 1st and 3rd films, the female leads are strong characters, capable of taking care of themselves. In TOD, she just whine and complained and wanted Indy to help her. Not too mention scenes tossed in just for the gross-out effect with no other reason for being there (the monkey-brain dinner with “snake surprise” :rolleyes: )
And the kid, Shortround, double :rolleyes: Indy doesn’t need a side-kick.
Then there’s the whole bit with whatever religion that was supposed to be. Taking a man’s heart out of his chest, then it magically seals and he’s still alive? A magic potion to turn Indy into a bad guy? Too much. Sure, there’s elements of that in the other films, but not to that extent. Nothing “magical” happens in the other films until the end (when the Arc is opened or the Grail is found), we aren’t subjected to it throughout the film as part of the plot.
Also much of TOD took place at the Temple. In the other films, Indy had the whole world to move around in and chase the bad guys.
That’s just my take on it though.
I must admit that you are one of my favorite posters, and it does my ol’ heart good that you replied.
In the beginning of TOD, Indy sells an artifact for an enormous diamond. Where’s the archealogy in that?
It’s because TOD wasn’t really an Indiana Jones movie. I don’t know what it was, but it wasn’t Indiana Jones.
As has already been pointed out:
Indy does not sell artifacts.
Indy does not need a sidekick.
Indy likes strong women. I think Kate Capshaw was in it because Spielberg had the hots for her (Didn’t she become Mrs. Speilberg shortly thereafter?).
The problem was (according to Siskel/Ebert) that they threw in every lame plot from an early B&W shorts series The Perils of Pauline. All cliffhangers with not much plot, just dangerous stunts that ended in a her actually hanging from a cliff so you’d come to the Bijoux the next Saturday. But in a long movie, they become pointless.
Wtf? Everyone I have ever known in my entire life has considered TOD to be the best Indiana Jones movie. It goes like this:
#1 - TOD
#2 - LC
#3 - RotLA
My feelings exactly FWIW.
Kate Capshaw did become the second Mrs. Spielberg.
Amy Irving was the first. Irving and Spielberg weren’t divorced when he took up with Capshaw. So much for family entertainment. 
Cisco, you need to hang around in a different crowd 
After the first Indy, Spielberg was quoted as saying that the intention of future movies in the series was to concentrate on the Occult, but after Temple’s bad reaction from the fans, they realised that they should go back to archaeology - or at least chases and world travel. And Sallah. And comedy sidekicks who are older than Indy rather than younger.
I think it was the simple fact that ToD played more like a Scrooge McDuck Adventures serial than anything else. Yeah, some parts were interesting, but for the most part, it just seemed like they were either going for the gag, or trying to sucker-punch the audience with emotional intensity (fear, horror, sorrow, pity). However, I must say that, while the thing with the bugs was very unrealistic, I thought it added a nice touch.
Ah, the old two value judgement system. It’s great or it sucks. The Temple of Doom wasn’t as good as the other two, which were great, so it sucks.
Nope, it isn’t as good as the first or third, both of which are great movies. Taken on its own, I consider it a good movie.
I dunno, you have to admit that the whole “Don’t let him touch your chest, he’ll pull your heart out!” was too hokey to fit in with the rest of the series. The mind-control potion I can buy, the “magic stones” thing I can buy (hey, there has to be some mysticism in the movie), but not the heart thing.
Lack of Nazis.
Spielberg is at his best when dealing with Nazis. You could say he’s as obsessed with them as Dr. Jones, Sr. is with the Grail. He’s made wonderful movies dealing with WW2 and its era. And the Nazis are bad guys that American audiences can get their minds around immediately. Mystic cults in the Middle East (or Asia – where the hell was TOD set?) don’t really ignite the passions of Americans the way Nazis do. There’s just no ambiguity there, and, best of all, it’s actually OK to surrender to the gut reaction and full-out hate them.
And rescuing a village’s kids, while noble, is nowhere near as cool as keeping a powerful, mystic relic out of the hands of the Nazis. Let’s face it, in the world of these films, Indiana Jones won World War Two twice.
I agree with most of the above posts, but for me the biggest problem was that damned opening – Indy and company escape from a stalled plane by jumping out with a Life Raft??? As if that shouldn’t have broken their necks, they then ride it pell-mell down a snow field, then fall several hundred feet into river rapids. Another opportunity for broken limbs galore! Then the ride the rapids downstream for a long time without upsetting or losing anything.
After that opening (which Lucas reportedly wanted to use in the first Indiana Joines flick), it’s hard to believe anything that comes afterwards. Suspension of disbelief is a fragile thing, and it’s hard to retrieve it after you’ve abused your audience’s sense of it. So right from the beginning they had an uphill battle.
As for Kate Capshw, that was evidently her year for being in movies where the Bad Guy Reaches Into a Chest and Pulls Out A Beating Heart (And the Victom Lives). The same damned thing happened in the movie Dreamscape, which she also starred in.
Finally, SPOOFE, I disagree with your statement:
As I point out in my essay in Teemings #5, all of Indiana’s films read like Scrooge McDuck adventures, and I mean that in a good way. ToD is, if anything, like a bad McDuck adventure – one not written by Carl Barks or by LaRosa.
The main failure of TOD is that it never let up. Once Indy went through that secret passage, there wasn’t a moment for the audience to catch their breath – a good action film has breaks in between the action sequence. It made viewing just too strenuous.
It wasn’t a terrible movie, but was the weakest of the three.
I think the essence of the problem, WHY the movie was so weak, is because of the unexpected success of Raiders.
Raiders of the Lost Ark, of course, was a blockbuster success, at the time one of the highest grossing films of all time and a slam-dunk cinematic masterpiece in anyone’s book. Its success pretty much required that a sequel be made.
The sequel, consequently, was made before anyone sat down to write it. As I’m sure most Indy fans know, the first movie had a lot of stunts and scenes planned that never made it in because there were just too many of them; consequently, when the pressure was on to make a second film, they started slotting special effects and stunt sequences into it. The script feels, unfortunately, as if it was written after the fact to string the plot together. That’s actually probably true of the first movie, too, but they had some time to think about that one.
The movie’s various sins - the lack of Nazis, the incredible irritating Chinese kid, and Kate Capshaw - are, IMO, all a product of the film’s rushed production and the failure to make the film its own unique treasure, rather than stuffing all the extra Raiders stuff into two hours of film.
That said, I didn’t think “Last Crusade” was all that hot a movie, either. It was better than TOD, but wasn’t even close to Raiders.
I agree with what’s been said already except that I feel the first movie is far and away the best. Last Crusade was largely retreads from the first film and goofy stuff like the Zelda game at the end of it.
I can see how everyone who has posted previously would think ToD was stupider than the others, but it’s my least favorite for a variaton of the reasons above. I totally agree that the suspense and action never let up and kept you in a stranglehold of suspense and anxiety, but I also think the tone of the film didn’t help, either. While the first and third films were world-wide, “stop-the-Nazis”, there was always an almost light, fun sense to them. There were moments of comedy mingled with the action. I don’t remember much comedy in ToD. I just remember it being so dark, depressing, and scary. It had an incredibly oppressive feel to it that couldn’t be escaped from–the whipping of Indy and his sidekick, the screams of children in the background, and the atmosphere gave such a dark mood, it was too hard to enjoy it like the other two.
While I agree with the other movie shortcomings posted, I think they are all dwarfed by the one Crunchy identified first: Kate Capshaw.
You could make a drinking game out of the number of times she said “IiiiiiiiiiinnnndeeeeEEEEEEEEEEEEE!” in that freaked-out exasperated tone.
I can forgive a lot of plot flaws. I cannot forgive her performance.
ToD is the William van Horn of the Duck canon.