Indiana Jones & The Entirely Satisfactory Conclusion!

[Bloo]

I don't know if you're serious bro or sarcastic

[so sorry]

MOD EDIT: Moved the Temple of Doom comments to an appropriate thread (not tin tin releated).

[The Vicar]

Temple sucks for several reasons. First, the "artifacts" Indy is looking for have no mythological resonance for us Western Civilization types. We can relate to lost arks and holy grails because we've heard of them, and they're important in our mythologies. These weird magic stones in Temple? Who the fuck cares? Sure, Indy had to save the children, but that just smacked of Spielberg being blatantly manipulative. "We have to care! He has to save the CHILDREN!!" Argh.

Second, the supporting characters basically suck. Short Round is deliberately annoying and it seems that every line of dialogue he has is shouted at the top of his lungs. And he has lots of lines. And that shrieking woman keeps shrieking and endlessly emphasizing what a fish out of water she is and how she can't cope and after ten minutes of this she's intolerable. Where's good, strong, brave Marion when you need her?

Third, the villains are way too comic-book. In Raiders, Indy fought the Nazis, who are villains we can understand and hate for real reasons. These weirdos in Temple are just too unbelievable, like characters from a Lovecraft story or something. Indy should be dealing with more realistic villains.

Fourth, the film just seems assembled out of over-the-top set pieces. Jumping out of the airplane with nothing more than an inflatable raft? Sure. Why not slide down the mountainside on it while we're at it? The whole dinner scene was pathetic - nothing more than an extended sequence of gross-outs. I'm sure the twelve-year-olds in the audience loved it. Then there's the mine race on the rails - Spielberg just ticking another item off his to-do list. Essentially, this whole film was just an exercise in going through the motions. No heart, no inspiration. It plays like it was made to fulfill a contractual obligation.

We have a winner!

[minstrel]

I don't know if you're serious bro or sarcastic

I'm absolutely serious. Temple of Doom sucks. They lost good, entertaining characters like Sallah and Brody and the delicious villain Belloq and replaced them with nobody I can remember. That's in addition to the points I made in my earlier post. ToD is a lousy movie. It's dull and brainless and unworthy as an Indy adventure, IMO.

[Bloo]

I don't know if you're serious bro or sarcastic

I'm absolutely serious. Temple of Doom sucks. They lost good, entertaining characters like Sallah and Brody and the delicious villain Belloq and replaced them with nobody I can remember. That's in addition to the points I made in my earlier post. ToD is a lousy movie. It's dull and brainless and unworthy as an Indy adventure, IMO.

and in the third one they replaced good, entertaining characters like Sallah and Brody with humorless, caractiures named Sallah and Brody.

Nothing compares to Raiders, it's a freaking Masterpiece...but Temple is miles better then Indiana Jones and the Daddy Issues

just because Lucas had a dog named Indiana, doesn't mean that Indiana had to have a dog named Indiana. I don't care where he got his name.

And your argument that the stones don't work because we don't have a connection to them...weak fucking sauce. They were a McGuffin, nothing more nothing less. Same with the ark and the grail. Hell how many people knew what the fuck the holy grail was before Indiana Jones? and then how many shows ripped off the idea of searching for the grail AFTER Indy? We only have a connection because Lucas created a connection. The McGuffin became more important then the characters.

short Round, for all his annoying scream at the top of you lungness, at least served a prupose and had his own hero moments. What the fuck did Marcus and Sallah do in Crusade except get lost and kidnapped and then offer nothing to the final showdown?

[minstrel]

I don't know if you're serious bro or sarcastic

I'm absolutely serious. Temple of Doom sucks. They lost good, entertaining characters like Sallah and Brody and the delicious villain Belloq and replaced them with nobody I can remember. That's in addition to the points I made in my earlier post. ToD is a lousy movie. It's dull and brainless and unworthy as an Indy adventure, IMO.

and in the third one they replaced good, entertaining characters like Sallah and Brody with humorless, caractiures named Sallah and Brody.

Nothing compares to Raiders, it's a freaking Masterpiece...but Temple is miles better then Indiana Jones and the Daddy Issues

just because Lucas had a dog named Indiana, doesn't mean that Indiana had to have a dog named Indiana. I don't care where he got his name.

And your argument that the stones don't work because we don't have a connection to them...weak fucking sauce. They were a McGuffin, nothing more nothing less. Same with the ark and the grail. Hell how many people knew what the fuck the holy grail was before Indiana Jones? and then how many shows ripped off the idea of searching for the grail AFTER Indy? We only have a connection because Lucas created a connection. The McGuffin became more important then the characters.

short Round, for all his annoying scream at the top of you lungness, at least served a prupose and had his own hero moments. What the fuck did Marcus and Sallah do in Crusade except get lost and kidnapped and then offer nothing to the final showdown?

If you read my post, you'll find that I was dumping all over Temple; I wasn't defending Crusade. Crusade has lots of flaws, some of which you have just brought up. For example, the villains in Crusade were utterly lifeless and unmemorable. And, like you, I won't forgive Lucas and Spielberg for emasculating Sallah and Brody. I mean, turning the smart and capable Brody of Raiders into a bumbling buffoon in Crusade was inexcusable.

And I was well aware of the holy grail before Crusade. I'm well up on my Arthurian mythology and other things too. And I'd even known about the lost ark of the covenant. Just because you don't have a connection doesn't mean that I didn't have a connection, or that I was depending on Lucas to create one for me.

In defense of Crusade, though, I will say this: It had River Phoenix as young Indy, and that sequence worked very well. It had Sean Connery, and he was excellent in the film. It had that final set piece at Petra in Jordan, which is an amazing setting, and that invisible-bridge thing was breathtaking for me the first time I saw it. In short, I think it has more to recommend it than Temple, and I enjoyed it more. Not a patch on Raiders, of course, but I think it's better than Temple.

[Bloo]

River Phoenix was great as a young Indy, and the sequence worked (and it led to the brilliant Young Indy series) but I felt it gave away too many mysteries that weren't really mysteries. I don't care where Indy got the whip, his hat, or that the dog's name was Indiana. You can already see Lucas bloating his prequels with that one scene. Temple, on the other hand, maybe the best prequel (segment or movie) that Lucas has been involved in. Crusdade's prequel scene serves mainly to introduce the McGuffin (the grail) and to show us where Indy got his...inspiration. You see a different, younger Indy in Temple. one that is more interested in fame and glory then in archaeology. You see WHY he's so damn set against what Belloq is doing in Raiders, because he's been there and it almost destroyed him (thanks Shorty ). It didn't end with Indy flying to the jungles of Guatamala or even preparing for that trip. It exisits solely in it's own world and yet takes the character back to his roots and you see not WHERE he got things, but WHY he was the way he was in Raiders. Crusade just emulates Raiders, it doesn't build on what Raiders gave us like a good sequel should. That's why I think Temple is better then Crusade (which is what got this started in the first place LOL)

[caruso_stalker217]

I seem to recall having this discussion three years ago.

ToD still fucking rocks.

[minstrel]

I seem to recall having this discussion three years ago.

ToD still has Indy looking for fucking rocks.

Fixed it for you.

[Cpt Kirks 2pay]

A great action adventure movie for all it's technicalities, story telling and support characters, all comes down to one thing - the main hero.

Of all the Indy movies, Temple of Doom is the one where you come out the theatre most wanting to be Indiana Jones. The guy is nearly like Superman, but that's not just physical but for all his inner fearlessness and courage too. He don't blink an eye when walking towards the enemy, evil and death. He faces greater, even suicidal danger than all he other films. Indy goes to Hell - and wins.

As the tagline of this movie said, "If Adventure has a name, it must be Indiana Jones". All that stuff inspired me growing up to be brave and keep my head above me when things were going to the shits. And the greatest inspiration to be Indiana Jones came from Temple of Doom.

In Crusade, his character story telling disappoints. But that's for another time wasting post.

[caruso_stalker217]

I seem to recall having this discussion three years ago.

ToD still has Indy looking for fucking rocks.

Fixed it for you.

[Spandau Belly]

TEMPLE OF DOOM is my favorite of all of Spielberg's films. The care and energy and attention to detail he puts in this film are just amazing. It is an incredibly creative movie in which Spielberg finds every ounce of tension, humour, and spectacle that can be mined from each scene.

It is an entirely surface level movie. No character arcs, no deep themes or issues, it is just pure cartoon adventure spectacle on biggest scale. In my opinion it works because each sequence is great, each sequence is different from the previous, and because each sequence leads to the next. It doesn't go in circles or get distracted with pointless subplots.

[Cpt Kirks 2pay]

I'm not saying that this is how to judge what movie is better than another, but when I got the DVD boxed set of these films and watched them all, whilst I worked on my laptop, I found myself paying more attention to Temple of Doom and being pulled into actually watching it's scenes more than the other films, yep, including Raiders as well.

[papalazeru]

I seem to recall having this discussion three years ago.

ToD still has Indy looking for fucking rocks.

Fixed it for you.

Ha! Brilliant spot and amendment Minstrel

[Peven]

if you watch all 4 Indy movies in a row shouldn't you watch Temple first so things go in chronological order?

[papalazeru]

if you watch all 4 Indy movies in a row shouldn't you watch Temple first so things go in chronological order?

Theres an Indy 4 movie? Whens it coming out then?

[Peven]

if you watch all 4 Indy movies in a row shouldn't you watch Temple first so things go in chronological order?

Theres an Indy 4 movie? Whens it coming out then?

I confess that while I have heard about a 4th Indy movie I have never actually seen it with my own eyes...so I can't absolutely verify its existence

[Cpt Kirks 2pay]

I drunk the blood of the Kali a few years back and one of it's symptoms was a nightmare for over 2 hours where I saw Indy 4. If you're telling me that it never existed I guess I must have burned myself a while ago and now I'm cured.

[TheBaxter]

if you watch all 4 Indy movies in a row shouldn't you watch Temple first so things go in chronological order?

Theres an Indy 4 movie? Whens it coming out then?

I confess that while I have heard about a 4th Indy movie I have never actually seen it with my own eyes...so I can't absolutely verify its existence

"Marion, don't look at it. Shut your eyes, Marion. Don't look at it, no matter what happens!"

[minstrel]

if you watch all 4 Indy movies in a row shouldn't you watch Temple first so things go in chronological order?

Theres an Indy 4 movie? Whens it coming out then?

"Three shall be the number of the count, and the number of the count shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, nor shalt thou count two, unless thou proceedest directly to three. FIVE IS RIGHT OUT!!"

[Spandau Belly]

I drink the blood of the Kali out this



People think it's cute.

[so sorry]

Quint's Behind the Scenes photo of the day

and right on cue, he posts a picture of Raiders, and the talkbacks ignite into a firestorm of Temple of Doom sucks debate!


P.S. Karen Allen was fucking scrumptious back in the day...I wonder if Spielbergo tapped that. I'm sure he tried...I'm just curious if he succeeded.

[Bloo]

I knew Quint visits the Zone, okay fess up which one of youse bastards is Quint?

[Fievel]

River Phoenix was great as a young Indy, and the sequence worked (and it led to the brilliant Young Indy series) but I felt it gave away too many mysteries that weren't really mysteries. I don't care where Indy got the whip, his hat, or that the dog's name was Indiana. You can already see Lucas bloating his prequels with that one scene.

And Last Crusade Brody = Prequel C-3PO. Seriously.

The reason I like Crusade over ToD is simple - it's a fun ride. Raiders was a fun ride. Temple of Doom was not fun. It was dark and menacing - two qualities I love in movies, just not Indiana Jones films.

[Peven]

River Phoenix was great as a young Indy, and the sequence worked (and it led to the brilliant Young Indy series) but I felt it gave away too many mysteries that weren't really mysteries. I don't care where Indy got the whip, his hat, or that the dog's name was Indiana. You can already see Lucas bloating his prequels with that one scene.

And Last Crusade Brody = Prequel C-3PO. Seriously.

The reason I like Crusade over ToD is simple - it's a fun ride. Raiders was a fun ride. Temple of Doom was not fun. It was dark and menacing - two qualities I love in movies, just not Indiana Jones films.

Indy frees a bunch of enslaved kids, helps save poor villagers from starvation and ruin, acts a father-figure, falls in love.....imo it made him more of a hero than Crusade easily, where all he did was stop a guy from living a long time in a cave.....seriously, has that not ever occurred to anyone? that is the only accomplishment in that movie. he didn't do anything to help the allies win the war, didn't throw a monkey wrench in Hitlers plans whatsoever, a lot of running around for nothing, as we see, Indy wasn't needed at all, since as soon as the bad guys would have tried to remove the Grail its powers would have been rendered useless. the Grail is the ultimate McGuffin in that movie, and that is why Crusade is clearly the weakest of the first three movies....

[minstrel]

Indy frees a bunch of enslaved kids, helps save poor villagers from starvation and ruin, acts a father-figure, falls in love.....imo it made him more of a hero than Crusade easily, where all he did was stop a guy from living a long time in a cave.....seriously, has that not ever occurred to anyone? that is the only accomplishment in that movie. he didn't do anything to help the allies win the war, didn't throw a monkey wrench in Hitlers plans whatsoever, a lot of running around for nothing, as we see, Indy wasn't needed at all, since as soon as the bad guys would have tried to remove the Grail its powers would have been rendered useless. the Grail is the ultimate McGuffin in that movie, and that is why Crusade is clearly the weakest of the first three movies....

Nobody, neither the good guys nor the bad guys, knew that the Grail powers wouldn't work beyond the cave when they all started out. Indy believed he was working to stop a great evil. You'd be right if he and the rest of the good guys knew that the bad guys were on a fool's quest.

And sure, Indy did all that stuff in ToD, but because of the points I made earlier, it's still boring. Indy in ToD is as much a hero as ... as ... I don't know, Tony the Tiger on a cereal box. It's all just Spielberg going through the motions, as I said, with no real heart. I mean, look at ToD. Who can you remember, besides Indy? The annoying yelling kid? The shrieking, scared, one-dimensional woman? The cartoon villains? Gimme a break. ToD is an Indy story dumbed down to the level of a seven year old. I'm not saying Crusade is great; I'm saying ToD sucks. That's all.

ToD sucks.

[Peven]

I respectfully disagree, I think ToD is easily the second best Indy movie and i think if you watch Gunga Din, obviously an inspiration for ToD, you'll see Spielberg was doing anything but going through the motions. no heart? man, I don't even know what to say to that, the way Short Round is affected seeing his hero, his pseudo father, being turned by the zombie juice was one of the most emotionally intense scenes of any of the Indy movies

tell me how Indy thought he was saving anyone or really hurting the nazis by finding the Grail? he wasn't under the illusion that it had any kind of power like the Ark which could have been used by the nazis, he was far from ignorant being that his father was THE authority on it. he could have gone home after saving his father. it was all for glory, hence the line in the movie where he is asked, "do you seek the Grail for HIS glory or your own"? as for villains, Crusade easily is hands down the weakest in that department as well, none can compare to the villains in Raiders or Temple, pedestrian and non-threatening, even Hitler is reduced to a bit of comic relief. Crusade is insubstantial fluff, innocuous but little more than an afterthought patched on to the franchise to make some $, something that was apparently repeated a couple years ago.

[Al Shut]

The reason I like Crusade over ToD is simple - it's a fun ride. Raiders was a fun ride. Temple of Doom was not fun. It was dark and menacing - two qualities I love in movies, just not Indiana Jones films.

Fuck, I just realized that based on fun I wouldn't know if I put Raiders before Temple or the other way round. Both behind Crusade of course.

[Spandau Belly]

I also don't see how anybody can say TEMPLE is just Spielberg going through the motions, if you want to call it a bloated hollow spectacle, I disagree but can at least understand that point of view. But if anything Spielberg's killing himself to go overthetop. The movie is full of scenes we've seen in other movies, but TEMPLE does them better than any other movie I can think of.

That openning scene is just brilliant. The way it goes back an forth with Indy and Lao Che always having one more ace up their sleave. It's Spielberg trying to do James Bond, but he ends up doing that type of scene better than I've seen in any actual Bond movie.

Lots of movies have scenes where characters go to some foreign land and get served gross things as food, but TEMPLE is the king with its snake surprise, chilled monkey brains, and eyeball soup.

The big sacrifice scenes are great. Both the first one where we see what happens when the sacrifice goes as planned and the later one when Kate is going to be sacrificed. We've scene coutnless movies where somebody is sacrificed in a ritual. But Spielberg just pours on the sense of ceremony and evil. If you want to see this type of scene done in a boring anti-climactic way, check out the recent reboot of CONAN THE BARBARIAN which completes my sanctuary of 1,000 poorly handled sacrifice scenes.

Same with the climax on the bridge, I've seen lots of action movies where a hero is on a bridge with bad guys coming at him from both sides, but TEMPLE does this scene the best.

[Cpt Kirks 2pay]

Thanks Peven for pointing out the futility of the Grail. I was saying this to Papalaz the other day at how rubbish the Grail's powers are considering you lose this when you cross the seal. There really is no point to fighting for the Grail at all, let alone that it doesn't even end up in the Nazis hands as Julian 'really he was the main villain?' Glover got here first, or the fact that even if anyone could become immoral for drinking from he cup it still don't protect you from dying from a bullet or something afterwards, so invincibility isn't granted from it from what I can gather.

Meanwhile, the thing about Raider and the Ark. You don' really need Indy a all. As it kills the Nazis as soon as hey open it's lid like someone in Australia lifting he toilet seat up only to have a a huge DEMON FUCK OFF SPIDER leap out at them, kill them, eat their brains then take control of their body and make them go around RAPING Koalas and force screening repeat viewings of that awful Ashton Kutcher film TO YOUR MOM!!!!!

[Al Shut]

or the fact that even if anyone could become immoral for drinking from he cup it still don't protect you from dying from a bullet or something afterwards, so invincibility isn't granted from it from what I can gather.

As far as I remember they used the Grail to heal Jones Seniors bullet wound

[TheBaxter]

i don't need to drink from some cup to become immoral.

[SilentScream]

"I wasn't happy with Temple Of Doom at all....there's not an ounce of my own personal feeling in Temple Of Doom."

Spielberg himself quoted from The Complete Indiana Jones: The Definitive Story Behind All Four Films.

And later from a documentry made about the flick:

"Temple Of Doom is my least favourite of the trilogy. I look back and I say the greatest thing I got out of that was that I met Kate Capshaw. We married years later and that to me was the reason I was fated to make Temple Of Doom."

Damning stuff from the Man himself and though this movie has it's admirers I'm with the filmmaker himself on this.

[minstrel]

I also don't see how anybody can say TEMPLE is just Spielberg going through the motions, if you want to call it a bloated hollow spectacle, I disagree but can at least understand that point of view. But if anything Spielberg's killing himself to go overthetop. The movie is full of scenes we've seen in other movies, but TEMPLE does them better than any other movie I can think of.

Spielberg is a very talented filmmaker and on ToD he was working with a huge budget. So of course, when he goes over the top, he goes WAY over the top. But that doesn't make it good. It doesn't make me feel for the characters. It's just "More! Bigger!" as if that's all that's necessary to make a great adventure movie.

That openning scene is just brilliant. The way it goes back an forth with Indy and Lao Che always having one more ace up their sleave. It's Spielberg trying to do James Bond, but he ends up doing that type of scene better than I've seen in any actual Bond movie.

The opening scene is the opposite of brilliant. We poisoned you, Indy, and now you have to chase all over the place to get the antidote! I felt so sorry for Harrison Ford when I saw this scene in the theater. Spielberg must have been saying "OK, Harrison, you've just been poisoned, so you're getting sicker and sicker and are about to die, but as you get sicker, you do more and more heroic action-hero things! It'll be great!" It was utterly unbelievable. I HATE that opening sequence. The opening of Raiders is the height of believability compared to this (and I LOVE the opening of Raiders!). And then when Ford finally drinks the antidote, it works immediately and everything is just fine again. Blah. I don't buy it for a second. I HATE HATE HATE the opening of Temple. Come on, guys, is this crap the best you can do?

Lots of movies have scenes where characters go to some foreign land and get served gross things as food, but TEMPLE is the king with its snake surprise, chilled monkey brains, and eyeball soup.

This is not a recommendation. This is kids having a farting contest.

The big sacrifice scenes are great. Both the first one where we see what happens when the sacrifice goes as planned and the later one when Kate is going to be sacrificed. We've scene coutnless movies where somebody is sacrificed in a ritual. But Spielberg just pours on the sense of ceremony and evil. If you want to see this type of scene done in a boring anti-climactic way, check out the recent reboot of CONAN THE BARBARIAN which completes my sanctuary of 1,000 poorly handled sacrifice scenes.

I haven't seen the new Conan, so I can't defend it. I hear it's terrible. But you can't pump up Temple by ragging on some other movie. Temple has to stand on its own merits, and it has very few.

[Bloo]

Spielberg also said he's basically a gun for hire when it comes to Indy. It lives and breathes by Lucas

I also know that as a creator and as a friend with creators, what we like and is close to our hearts isn't that close to others and what others like or is close to their hearts is stuff we hate.

[Peven]

i don't need to drink from some cup to become immoral.

yeah, but if there is tequila in that cup is sure does help

[minstrel]

I respectfully disagree, I think ToD is easily the second best Indy movie and i think if you watch Gunga Din, obviously an inspiration for ToD, you'll see Spielberg was doing anything but going through the motions. no heart? man, I don't even know what to say to that, the way Short Round is affected seeing his hero, his pseudo father, being turned by the zombie juice was one of the most emotionally intense scenes of any of the Indy movies

I found that scene blatantly manipulative, probably because I already didn't like Short Round. He started the movie as a caricature and that's what he stayed. I never once bought him as a real boy; he was just loud comic relief. He's there for pretty much the same reason crap screenwriters always have a scene in which the dog is saved from imminent death. The audience is supposed to go "Awwww ... the dog lives!"

tell me how Indy thought he was saving anyone or really hurting the nazis by finding the Grail? he wasn't under the illusion that it had any kind of power like the Ark which could have been used by the nazis, he was far from ignorant being that his father was THE authority on it. he could have gone home after saving his father. it was all for glory, hence the line in the movie where he is asked, "do you seek the Grail for HIS glory or your own"? as for villains, Crusade easily is hands down the weakest in that department as well, none can compare to the villains in Raiders or Temple, pedestrian and non-threatening, even Hitler is reduced to a bit of comic relief. Crusade is insubstantial fluff, innocuous but little more than an afterthought patched on to the franchise to make some $, something that was apparently repeated a couple years ago.

Once again, I'm not defending Crusade, I'm slamming Temple! You can't defend Temple by ragging on some other movie. As I said before, I prefer Crusade, largely because of Connery and Phoenix, but that doesn't mean I think it's a great film. But Temple doesn't even have Connery or Phoenix. It's got pretty much zero.

Spielberg is as good as any director I've ever seen at putting together exciting set pieces. But he's not good at developing characters or resolving plots. For those aspects of storytelling, he is entirely dependent on his script. If the script is good (Jaws, Raiders), the movie is great. But Spielberg doesn't have the chops to create a great movie from a weak script. Temple and Crusade both have weak scripts.

[SilentScream]

I respectfully disagree, I think ToD is easily the second best Indy movie and i think if you watch Gunga Din, obviously an inspiration for ToD, you'll see Spielberg was doing anything but going through the motions. no heart? man, I don't even know what to say to that, the way Short Round is affected seeing his hero, his pseudo father, being turned by the zombie juice was one of the most emotionally intense scenes of any of the Indy movies

I found that scene blatantly manipulative, probably because I already didn't like Short Round. He started the movie as a caricature and that's what he stayed. I never once bought him as a real boy; he was just loud comic relief. He's there for pretty much the same reason crap screenwriters always have a scene in which the dog is saved from imminent death. The audience is supposed to go "Awwww ... the dog lives!"

tell me how Indy thought he was saving anyone or really hurting the nazis by finding the Grail? he wasn't under the illusion that it had any kind of power like the Ark which could have been used by the nazis, he was far from ignorant being that his father was THE authority on it. he could have gone home after saving his father. it was all for glory, hence the line in the movie where he is asked, "do you seek the Grail for HIS glory or your own"? as for villains, Crusade easily is hands down the weakest in that department as well, none can compare to the villains in Raiders or Temple, pedestrian and non-threatening, even Hitler is reduced to a bit of comic relief. Crusade is insubstantial fluff, innocuous but little more than an afterthought patched on to the franchise to make some $, something that was apparently repeated a couple years ago.

Once again, I'm not defending Crusade, I'm slamming Temple! You can't defend Temple by ragging on some other movie. As I said before, I prefer Crusade, largely because of Connery and Phoenix, but that doesn't mean I think it's a great film. But Temple doesn't even have Connery or Phoenix. It's got pretty much zero.

Spielberg is as good as any director I've ever seen at putting together exciting set pieces. But he's not good at developing characters or resolving plots. For those aspects of storytelling, he is entirely dependent on his script. If the script is good (Jaws, Raiders), the movie is great. But Spielberg doesn't have the chops to create a great movie from a weak script. Temple and Crusade both have weak scripts.

In fairness, it's hard for ANY director, let alone someone of Spielberg's stature, to make a great movie from a weak script. But I see your point and do agree. I, too, especially disliked Short Round; a thoroughly 'device' kind of character, quite unlikeable and considering how well Spielberg is when dealing with kids in his flicks, a rather unsympathetic and unpalatable one, too; almost as annoying as Capshaw's hysterical histrionics. This all just added to the crudeness of it all; the throwaway disdain that Spielberg seemed to have for the whole enterprise. It's Indy by numbers and, Christ, does it show on the screen. It's that rare Spielberg beast; a movie that just doesn't care and doesn't want to care either.

[Al Shut]

That openning scene is just brilliant. The way it goes back an forth with Indy and Lao Che always having one more ace up their sleave. It's Spielberg trying to do James Bond, but he ends up doing that type of scene better than I've seen in any actual Bond movie.

The opening scene is the opposite of brilliant. We poisoned you, Indy, and now you have to chase all over the place to get the antidote! I felt so sorry for Harrison Ford when I saw this scene in the theater. Spielberg must have been saying "OK, Harrison, you've just been poisoned, so you're getting sicker and sicker and are about to die, but as you get sicker, you do more and more heroic action-hero things! It'll be great!" It was utterly unbelievable. I HATE that opening sequence. The opening of Raiders is the height of believability compared to this (and I LOVE the opening of Raiders!). And then when Ford finally drinks the antidote, it works immediately and everything is just fine again. Blah. I don't buy it for a second. I HATE HATE HATE the opening of Temple. Come on, guys, is this crap the best you can do?

The opening is brilliant. In fact Temple is on TV tonight and I know for sure what I'll be watching the beginning of. Exchange sicker with physically abused/wounded and you have a standard criticism for every action movie ever made. The opening perfectly sets the tone for the kind of implausibility you can expect from the rest of the movie (inlateable boat, mine lores). Unbelievable you say? Anything goes I say!

[Cpt Kirks 2pay]

"I wasn't happy with Temple Of Doom at all....there's not an ounce of my own personal feeling in Temple Of Doom."

Spielberg himself quoted from The Complete Indiana Jones: The Definitive Story Behind All Four Films.

And later from a documentry made about the flick:

"Temple Of Doom is my least favourite of the trilogy. I look back and I say the greatest thing I got out of that was that I met Kate Capshaw. We married years later and that to me was the reason I was fated to make Temple Of Doom."

Damning stuff from the Man himself and though this movie has it's admirers I'm with the filmmaker himself on this.

He said similar things about The Lost World. And that was a better film than Jurassic Park.

[Cpt Kirks 2pay]

or the fact that even if anyone could become immoral for drinking from he cup it still don't protect you from dying from a bullet or something afterwards, so invincibility isn't granted from it from what I can gather.

As far as I remember they used the Grail to heal Jones Seniors bullet wound

Yeah but I'm not on about that. I mean, after you've drunk water from the Grail and THEN you got shot, knifed by a Chav etc. My point being, drinking from the Grail don't make you Wolverine.

[minstrel]

The opening is brilliant. In fact Temple is on TV tonight and I know for sure what I'll be watching the beginning of. Exchange sicker with physically abused/wounded and you have a standard criticism for every action movie ever made. The opening perfectly sets the tone for the kind of implausibility you can expect from the rest of the movie (inlateable boat, mine lores). Unbelievable you say? Anything goes I say!

I can't think of the opening of Temple as even remotely close to brilliant unless I think of the entire film as a Monty Pythonesque parody of an Indiana Jones movie. If Graham Chapman had stepped into the scene at some point, dressed in his military uniform, and said "Stop that, stop that. Now it's got silly", I would have laughed. But Temple is the most humorless of all the Indy movies, so it fails utterly even there.

The opening is unbrilliant. The whole movie is unbrilliant. I wish I could find a saving grace in it somewhere, but it's one of the most disappointing Spielberg films there is (though it isn't as bad as Hook). Raiders had such a sense of life from beginning to end, and Temple is limp and dead.

[SilentScream]

Now Hook is a grade 1 shit film. Was Steven on meds when he made THAT thing???

[Cpt Kirks 2pay]

I also don't see how anybody can say TEMPLE is just Spielberg going through the motions, if you want to call it a bloated hollow spectacle, I disagree but can at least understand that point of view. But if anything Spielberg's killing himself to go overthetop. The movie is full of scenes we've seen in other movies, but TEMPLE does them better than any other movie I can think of.

Spielberg is a very talented filmmaker and on ToD he was working with a huge budget. So of course, when he goes over the top, he goes WAY over the top. But that doesn't make it good. It doesn't make me feel for the characters. It's just "More! Bigger!" as if that's all that's necessary to make a great adventure movie.

I don't credit the creative ideas in Temple of Doom to it's budget or size. I credit it to all the little creative touches that Spielberg puts in the film. It feels like every 10 seconds there's an extra drop of icing on the cake to what's already going on. Whereas most directors just figure ways to tell the story in an action scene, Spielberg is that guy who has reserves of creative energy who can say "Hang on, let's also do this too, it'll be fun/funny". The Obi Wan club fight... ice falling on the floor disguising the diamond, Indy getting hit, then hitting a girl, the back and forth passing of the ashes on the turn table for the diamond, Indy observing the dancing girls coming out as well as the hoodlums, then the balloons, all adding to the chaos. Nice try Lao Che... Lao Che plane.

If this is Spielberg being uninspired in making a film, it don't show too much. I clearly see a filmmaker having lots of fun.

[minstrel]

He said similar things about The Lost World. And that was a better film than Jurassic Park.

Your credibility score has just hit negative numbers. You are now sentenced to defend this statement with facts and evidence, if any exist, until such time as you regain credibility or you are dead.

[caruso_stalker217]

I'm afraid I'm gonna have to side with Kirks on this one. THE LOST WORLD pretty much beats JURASSIC PARK, hands down. And then they let the T-Rex loose in San Diego and then... not so much.

[Cpt Kirks 2pay]

He said similar things about The Lost World. And that was a better film than Jurassic Park.

Your credibility score has just hit negative numbers. You are now sentenced to defend this statement with facts and evidence, if any exist, until such time as you regain credibility or you are dead.

Haha. OK, 5 points where Jurassic Park is Poo and The Lost World is wonderful..

Jurassic Park has only 2 real good bits. The T Rex attacking the car and The Velociraptors chasing the kids.
The Lost World has many memorable action scenes.

JP has no visual style it's bland. Use a freaking coloured lens filter or something, Steven!
The Lost World is dark, has atmosphere.

JP hasn't many themes.
JP talks about being God for a while, then it's just about getting the power turned on and getting a chopper home.
The Lost World is about actually us being the real monsters to the Dinos and mistreating them. It's a tree/Dino hugging movie and all the better for it.

JP has shit characters and acting. SHIT! Sam Neill sees his first Dino - he takes a dump - watch it again! I hate Laura Dern in this. I HATE HER!!!
The Lost World has better, meaner, and more complex performances. I'm talking about Pete Posthelwaite and his crew as well as Jeff, Julianne and soon to be all round studly useless bastard, Vince Vaughn.

JP has fuck all story. Again, turn the power on, avoid the monsters.
The Lost World is about men fighting men over the Dinos, conservation for the Dinos, and avoiding the chaos that will follow if the whole world sees and discovers these creatures.

[caruso_stalker217]

The opening scene is the opposite of brilliant. We poisoned you, Indy, and now you have to chase all over the place to get the antidote! I felt so sorry for Harrison Ford when I saw this scene in the theater. Spielberg must have been saying "OK, Harrison, you've just been poisoned, so you're getting sicker and sicker and are about to die, but as you get sicker, you do more and more heroic action-hero things! It'll be great!" It was utterly unbelievable. I HATE that opening sequence. The opening of Raiders is the height of believability compared to this (and I LOVE the opening of Raiders!). And then when Ford finally drinks the antidote, it works immediately and everything is just fine again. Blah. I don't buy it for a second. I HATE HATE HATE the opening of Temple. Come on, guys, is this crap the best you can do?

The fact that you're complaining about this tells me you've missed the point of this film entirely.

I'm sure next you'll be telling us this isn't what happened last week, they've just cheated us, and that he didn't get out of the cock-a-doodie car.

[minstrel]

The opening scene is the opposite of brilliant. We poisoned you, Indy, and now you have to chase all over the place to get the antidote! I felt so sorry for Harrison Ford when I saw this scene in the theater. Spielberg must have been saying "OK, Harrison, you've just been poisoned, so you're getting sicker and sicker and are about to die, but as you get sicker, you do more and more heroic action-hero things! It'll be great!" It was utterly unbelievable. I HATE that opening sequence. The opening of Raiders is the height of believability compared to this (and I LOVE the opening of Raiders!). And then when Ford finally drinks the antidote, it works immediately and everything is just fine again. Blah. I don't buy it for a second. I HATE HATE HATE the opening of Temple. Come on, guys, is this crap the best you can do?

The fact that you're complaining about this tells me you've missed the point of this film entirely.

What, precisely, is the point of this film? Other than to grab more money from Raiders fans?

Don't fall into the trap of defending garbage by saying "But it's MEANT to be garbage! It's OUTSTANDING garbage! It's the best garbage EVAR!" It's garbage - get over it.

I'm sure next you'll be telling us this isn't what happened last week, they've just cheated us, and that he didn't get out of the cock-a-doodie car.

Nope. I'm not Annie Wilkes. You'll note that in a previous post here I complained that Temple doesn't have enough humor. Annie was not about having a sense of humor.

[minstrel]

I'm afraid I'm gonna have to side with Kirks on this one. THE LOST WORLD pretty much beats JURASSIC PARK, hands down. And then they let the T-Rex loose in San Diego and then... not so much.

Ugh. There are no compelling characters in The Lost World. Maybe Pete Postlethwaite, but that's it. The problem with The Lost World is that it doesn't focus on characters. People just float in and out of scenes almost as it they're props, just for the dinosaurs to menace. In JP, there were real characters I cared about, and the movie stayed focused on them, so that when they were in danger I felt an adrenaline rush. I didn't give a crap about anybody in TLW, so I snoozed through it. And when the T-Rex arrived in San Diego, I laughed. Are we supposed to be emotionally involved with this family we've never met before this one scene? Are we supposed to care about characters that haven't been introduced before?

TLW is poor storytelling. It's utterly forgettable. I'm amazed that there are people here defending it.