Well, this is my first time posting here and I couldn?t come up with any topics to discuss so I thought I should write up a review of why Temple of Doom is not only a great movie but also worthy of calling itself an Indy film.
First of all I agree that the film does lag behind in some ways to it's predecessor and it's sequel. Willie Scott's constant screaming can get on one's nerves at times. The film also focuses more on the action than the story and as a result the film doesn't quite have the balance between great story and action the other two have. Also, there isn't many clues to find the stones. Part of the fun of the other two was seeing Indy use his archaeological knowledge to uncover clues and deciphering them. The Sankara Stones don't really invest our interest as the Grail or the Ark. It's also never clarified how the Thuggees will use them to drive the British out of India and rule the world.
Still, Temple has it's good points:
- Harrison Ford's great performance. I like how we get to see Indy's dark side in this film and see that he looks like he's really enjoying taking part in the brutal bloodletting of the Thuggee when he's drugged in the Black Sleep. Indy looks like he could kill anything in his path and very nearly kills Short Round and Willie. I liked the references to Humphrey Bogart as well: Indy's "Casablanca" suit at the nightclub and the tip of the hat he gives to the snake statue in the Temple and his entire "fortune and glory" character arc.
-The film scores points for not being a retread of Raiders. It has a different setting, mood and story, sidekicks for Indy, different villains for him to go up against. I certainly didn't mind the film's gloomy, downbeat feel at all. In fact, that's something that gives the film it's own personality. Hey, after all the film is called 'The Temple of Doom".
- I liked Short Round. Some of you reading this might not know this, but Shorty is another reference to the action/adventure serials that the Indy films are based on. In the serials the heroes had kid sidekicks tag along with them on their adventures. I thought the father-son relationship with Indy was a nice touch and showed us a different side of Indy in that he is an unreluctant father type. It was touching to see how Short Round looked up to Indy and Willie as his parent figures due to his parents being killed when he was young. I also liked how Indy, Shorty and Willie develop into a little family unit by the end of the film, similar to the Ripley, Newt and Hicks trio in Aliens.
- the action sequences are awesome and provide some of the best moments of the series: the spiked chamber, minecar chase, faceoff on the bridge, nightclub shootout, heart ripping ceremony, voodoo doll fight and the fight with the entire Thuggee cult in the cave. The thrills certainly come faster and I believe not many other other films in history, except Raiders and Crusade, has ever successfully staged action sequences as well.
- John William's score for Temple is in my opinion, his best of the trilogy. I like how it expands on the Raiders score and adds dark, Eastern themes.
- The look and photography of the film is again, I feel the best of the trilogy. The way color and lighting is used in the Shanghai scenes and the use of reds and blacks in the Temple itself all looks great. Whereas, Raiders and Crusade had a brown, "dusty earth" tone, Temple has an exotic, lush jungle feel and is beautiful to look at.
- I liked how the film mixed dark action adventure with some humor thrown in.
The film isn't racist. I'm Indian and I'm not bothered by the movie. They only show the Thuggee (they were a real cult, but somewhat exaggerated in the film) as savages not all of Indian culture. Likewise, in Raiders and Crusade, the Nazis are shown as evil scumbags not all Germans in general. True, there is some stereotyping of the villagers but it isn't done in an offensive manner. Indy is the hero of the film so of course he will be portrayed as a heroic savior figure. I have never noticed race being used in the film as a basis for heroics.
It's rather annoying for me to hear Steven Spielberg and George Lucas themselves join in on taking punches at the movie. They should be proud of the film and not ashamed of it. While both of them are two of the most talented filmmakers of all time and have given us some of the greatest films ever made, they both have done worse than Temple.
I don?t accept Spielberg?s "apology" for making the film either, as I'm happy with the fun film that it is. Even if it is inferior to Raiders that doesn't make it a bad movie and it does get a spot on my favorite movies of all time.
If I were to rate the film I would give it an 8 out of 10. While I would give Raiders a 10 and Crusade a 9.
[Edited by bungle92 on 02-25-2004 at 04:43 pm]
First of all I agree that the film does lag behind in some ways to it's predecessor and it's sequel. Willie Scott's constant screaming can get on one's nerves at times. The film also focuses more on the action than the story and as a result the film doesn't quite have the balance between great story and action the other two have. Also, there isn't many clues to find the stones. Part of the fun of the other two was seeing Indy use his archaeological knowledge to uncover clues and deciphering them. The Sankara Stones don't really invest our interest as the Grail or the Ark. It's also never clarified how the Thuggees will use them to drive the British out of India and rule the world.
Still, Temple has it's good points:
- Harrison Ford's great performance. I like how we get to see Indy's dark side in this film and see that he looks like he's really enjoying taking part in the brutal bloodletting of the Thuggee when he's drugged in the Black Sleep. Indy looks like he could kill anything in his path and very nearly kills Short Round and Willie. I liked the references to Humphrey Bogart as well: Indy's "Casablanca" suit at the nightclub and the tip of the hat he gives to the snake statue in the Temple and his entire "fortune and glory" character arc.
-The film scores points for not being a retread of Raiders. It has a different setting, mood and story, sidekicks for Indy, different villains for him to go up against. I certainly didn't mind the film's gloomy, downbeat feel at all. In fact, that's something that gives the film it's own personality. Hey, after all the film is called 'The Temple of Doom".
- I liked Short Round. Some of you reading this might not know this, but Shorty is another reference to the action/adventure serials that the Indy films are based on. In the serials the heroes had kid sidekicks tag along with them on their adventures. I thought the father-son relationship with Indy was a nice touch and showed us a different side of Indy in that he is an unreluctant father type. It was touching to see how Short Round looked up to Indy and Willie as his parent figures due to his parents being killed when he was young. I also liked how Indy, Shorty and Willie develop into a little family unit by the end of the film, similar to the Ripley, Newt and Hicks trio in Aliens.
- the action sequences are awesome and provide some of the best moments of the series: the spiked chamber, minecar chase, faceoff on the bridge, nightclub shootout, heart ripping ceremony, voodoo doll fight and the fight with the entire Thuggee cult in the cave. The thrills certainly come faster and I believe not many other other films in history, except Raiders and Crusade, has ever successfully staged action sequences as well.
- John William's score for Temple is in my opinion, his best of the trilogy. I like how it expands on the Raiders score and adds dark, Eastern themes.
- The look and photography of the film is again, I feel the best of the trilogy. The way color and lighting is used in the Shanghai scenes and the use of reds and blacks in the Temple itself all looks great. Whereas, Raiders and Crusade had a brown, "dusty earth" tone, Temple has an exotic, lush jungle feel and is beautiful to look at.
- I liked how the film mixed dark action adventure with some humor thrown in.
The film isn't racist. I'm Indian and I'm not bothered by the movie. They only show the Thuggee (they were a real cult, but somewhat exaggerated in the film) as savages not all of Indian culture. Likewise, in Raiders and Crusade, the Nazis are shown as evil scumbags not all Germans in general. True, there is some stereotyping of the villagers but it isn't done in an offensive manner. Indy is the hero of the film so of course he will be portrayed as a heroic savior figure. I have never noticed race being used in the film as a basis for heroics.
It's rather annoying for me to hear Steven Spielberg and George Lucas themselves join in on taking punches at the movie. They should be proud of the film and not ashamed of it. While both of them are two of the most talented filmmakers of all time and have given us some of the greatest films ever made, they both have done worse than Temple.
I don?t accept Spielberg?s "apology" for making the film either, as I'm happy with the fun film that it is. Even if it is inferior to Raiders that doesn't make it a bad movie and it does get a spot on my favorite movies of all time.
If I were to rate the film I would give it an 8 out of 10. While I would give Raiders a 10 and Crusade a 9.
[Edited by bungle92 on 02-25-2004 at 04:43 pm]
Last edited: