In Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, Indiana sees firsthand magic. But in Raiders of the Last Ark...

In Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, Indiana sees firsthand magic. But in Raiders of the Last Ark, he's very skeptical. Why?

BEcause they hadn't written Ark with the idea of sequels (or prequels)

Maybe he thinks he was drugged by the food

What was he skeptical about in Raiders, I can't remember

He was on drugs on Doom. He rationalized as a hallucination

Wasn't there a similar sort of skepticism towards the occult in Last Crusade? And all movies and shows do that, where the characters are aquatinted with one type of supernatural occurrence, but refuse to believe another is possible

He saw firsthand the Hindu religion being real. In Ark, he's seeing the Hebrew religion being real. I think it's possible he didn't think both could exist at the same time.

>yfw Indiana exists in a world where all the world religions myths and stories are real and co-exist with each other

He was skeptical of the Ark being a magical artifact, not magic in general

If you witness someone doing magic it doesn't mean you'll immediately assume leprechauns must exist

best moment in the entire movie or best moment in the entire series?

Temple is a prequel? I had no idea

He seemed to somewhat dismiss the Ark as another ancient trinket with ancient tales of it containing “Lightning. Fire. Power of God or something.”

IIRC, he does have a distant pensive look on his face when he discussed it. I suppose one could either interpret that as his wondering if any of those legends had any truth to them, or, he could have simply been lusting after the glory of being the one to discover it and bring it to a domestic museum.

Yes, Doom begins in 1935, Raiders in 1936.

>on drugs

and so was probably everyone else in this jungle death cult

unnecessary if you ask me, with a few adjustments could have easily taken place a few years after Raiders

Temple of doom is my favourite Indiana Jones film and I don't understand how people can think it's the worst of the original trilogy.

Come at me

It doesn't even come close to Raiders but I agree it's better than Crusade

I think he was just trying to be as objective as possible, he at least did believe it existed even if the power it held didn't, and like you said, getting hold of it was a priority, if not for the sake of a monumental historical discovery, but to keep it out of the Nazis hands

The chick is pretty shrill but everything else is top of the pops

Spielberg's wife and the Asian kid were so fucking annoying but besides that it was just as much funkino as the other two

>not liking short stop

what kind of faggot are you?

>Shortstop

OKEY DOKEY DOKTOR JONES!!!!

It's always been my least favorite of the trilogy. But I admire it for doing something different and it also has probably one of John Williams's best scores in a movie ever.

The asian kid ruined it despite being kinda cool in the beginning. Also the woman acted about as dumb as a woman possibly could.

It's still not that bad of a movie. I just think Raiders was the best.

Long live the flying Spaghettimonster desu
Ramen

Absolutely. It's such great moment because you totally get both perspectives.

You're totally with Indy and wanna be like "PRESS THE FUCKING BUTTON!!", but then you see that hole from her perspective and you're like "fuuuuuuuuck.....I am NOT reaching in there. Nice knowin you homie."

Yup, good points!

In Temple he saw Hindu magic but was still skeptical to Christian magic in Raiders