Excluding Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, why is Temple of Doom generally considered to be the worst Indiana Jones film?

Excluding Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, why is Temple of Doom generally considered to be the worst Indiana Jones film?

I don't know, it's my favorite one...

KALI MA!

They're all pretty bad

It might be the 'worst' of the original trilogy but it's still good and it best matches the tone of the IJ franchise anyway; one of schlocky fun and adventure.

weeeeird, im watching it right now when i saw this. It;s definitely my least favorite apart form crystal skull obviously. It has some good parts and the setting is kinda cool but other than that last crusade and raiders are far far superior

> It is the second installment in the Indiana Jones franchise and a prequel to the 1981 film Raiders of the Lost Ark and followed by Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade in 1989

Also holy fuck, how did I never know Doom was a PREQUEL to Raiders? As far as I remember this was never made clear in the film.

the woman was annoying. biblical themes are way more interesting for americans than whatever that indian stuff was.

>annoying sidekick
>dumb broad
pretty much it

I liked it more than the Last Crusade.

My favorite.

"Not being as good as Raiders or Last Crusade" isn't really that damning, op.

it wasn't, but on the other hand it didin't have to be. its like James Bond films it doesn't matter when they were set

the only way you knew it was a prequel was by the year that showed up at the beginning of the movie

No Nazis. Too long of a time period between classic old adventure stories about Kali cults in India.

>annoying sidekicks
>no one gives a fuck about pseudo indian stuff unless you a tryhard
>worst acting of all the movies
>most stupid, I mean seriously the launch themselves from a plane with a lifeboat

but now there's the meme that it's the best because OMG SO DARK AND GRITTY AND VIOLENT! because of Reddit Letter Media

>As far as I remember this was never made clear in the film.

The only indication is the year title card at the beginning. Raiders says 1936, South America at the beginning, Temple says 1935, Shanghai.

Crusade starts in 1912, then 1938

Cool set designs and and very rewatchable, but the annoying and unfunny Willie character hurts it and it gets needlessly dreary and depressing with the child slave plot and it drags a bit in the middle. Still, I prefer it to Last Crusade, but Last Crusade is more of a crowd-pleaser.

Can someone give a good goddamn reason why Lucas/Spielberg made this a prequel?

It was the only one I liked as a kid, probably because there was a major kid character, played by Data from Goonies, plus it had the minecart chase and the raft mountain slide and stuff.

I still like it, but now I prefer Last Crusade.

Does anyone else think Raiders has aged really poorly?

>Can someone give a good goddamn reason why Lucas/Spielberg made this a prequel?

Maybe they wanted Indy to still be a skeptic, and not a changed man like he would have been after Raiders. Not that he comes off as a skeptic in Temple of Doom that I can recall.

Maybe they just finished it and thought Marian was better than Willie, so we make this a prequel and we can still pretend he ended up with Marian.

Or maybe they had a really specific 1935 event in mind surrounding Thuggee cults or something that wouldn't make as much sense in 1937 if you're an autist? I have no idea.

I agree with you about Willie being annoying but Short Round was fucking alpha, mate

The Last Crusade is the best possible movie to watch on Father's Day

Thanks: The first two sound likely, and lousy.

Dunno, I don't know if I'm just too much of a pleb but Raiders does feel kinda dull at times. It's 'rough' I think?

It's got a darker toner than the other two movies (apparently it was at least partly responsible for the creation of the PG-13 rating?) and like others have said it has Willie who never. shuts. up. It's good, just pales a little next to the other two.

This.

No, my dad is patrician so we watch kino on his day, not a flick.

But Mr. Jones!

Something about designated streets

Too much dicking around, not enough adventure

It doesn't have Nazis so the brainwashed idiots who watch these movies can't ejaculate to Indy punching Nazis.

It was my favorite as a kid.
I guess I still have a soft spot for it in my heart.

Short Round

Raiders has Nazis trying to get their hands on the ark of the covenant to win the war.
Last Crusade has nazis trying to get their hands on the holy grail.
Temple of Doom has some glowing stones, some low-key human sacrifices and child slavery.

If it had been the first movie to come out it would have been a good start, but just making it a prequel doesn't work. If Last Crusade had also had a low-key relic it wouldn't have felt odd. But putting it in the middle between two major relics, both of which could win the Nazis the war, make it stand out as chump change. The stakes of the movie instantly deflates it. What are some ripped-out hearts and child slaves against the Nazis getting their hands on biblical WMDs?

I'm sure that people who watch it first, like befits a prequel, have a more favourable view upon it than people who started the trilogy by watching Raiders for this simple reason.

well Raiders is arguably one of the greatest movies ever made
And Last Crusade covers all the bases you could want from the premise, so its tough trilogy to join, and one of them has to be the worst.
They went with a different angle, and without the nazis as antagonists it starts at a disadvantage, but it works well and and by breaking up the timeline with a prequel it left it open for a continuation, possibly bond style with a different actor which i think could have worked.

imo if you dont thoroughly enjoy the Indianna Jones movies, your a fuck wit who doesn't know how to enjoy themself.

as for Crystal skull, it was a shamless cash grab and its not to be spoken of

>that part in Temple of Dooms

It actually is the best. Just look:
>Best Indy girl, portrayed by the best of the three Indy actresses
>cool first scenes in the club, with epic triad guys
>the scene of the mine is the best of the franchise
>cool, Asian sidekick
>no nazis' cliche
>knowledge was not their treasure

Short round is cool, Willie is annoying and unattractive.
Her role would have been better suited for an Indian bae like one of the Raja's wives or a sister for added tension and comedy but I guess they needed a bitchy, haggard looking white girl for Indy to bone.

For anyone interested

Pic related was based on the real life Nazi archaeologist Otto Rahn
whose books; 'Crusade agaisnt the grail' and 'Lucifer's Court' are truly fantastic.

He was also the only open homosexual in the Nazi party

This. Also Indiana Jones means action and Tod has it in spades.

Lucas was divorcing his wife at the time and "In a very bad mood" so hence the ripping out the heart and dark stuff.

Willie sucked, yeah.
But the roller-coaster mine-carts ruined it for me when I saw it in the theater originally. That was stupid. But the bug scene reaching into that indentation in the wall to reverse the "booty trap" really got to my dad, I remember...

And the monkey brains were cool.

but with that kick-ass soundtrack...

c'mon, the Ark theme?
haunting...

Worst is pretty strong. They are all great but Temple is slightly less so than Raiders and Crusade. Crystal skull never happened. Stop bringing it up plz.

better than any of those YLYL responses...

>the woman was annoying

First one to get the correct answer. That god awful song at the start didn't help at all either

>Crystal skull never happened. Stop bringing it up plz.

When Lucas misses he fucking MISSES. I wonder what possessed him and Spielberg to get it so wrong?

kingdom of crystal ayylmoas is pretty good until "mud" turns up.

doom
raiders
crusade
skull.

HOLY CRAP!

I had no idea of this... just read a short bio clip and my mind is blown. They actually did research back in the day. All the way down to his gay laugh...

Thanks for this tip.
Will look up more, later.

>I will always love that opening bar scene from Raiders with the fire and all and how it plays into the plot later in the film.

Exactly. The only thing better Raiders had was the Gestapo dude. But Raiders is too boring

The fridge and the vine swinging are the only really bad moments. Indy diving through tunnels and blow darting indigenous peoples is the best scene in the movie.

The look he gives Shia when they ruin Marcus' statue is pretty sad

>the only open homosexual in the Nazi party
Maybe after the SA purge.

I watched the whole series about two months ago for the first time and Raiders seemed like it borrowed from detective and puzzle stories, where Indy was figuring things out as frequently as he was getting into action. They kept the sense of danger intact in these scenes with the constant threat of danger (the monkey and poisoned food scenes come to mind) which slows those scenes down even more. Last Crusade was just action and characters with no huge amounts of puzzle solving or mystery stuff, and it felt faster as a result.

I still like Raiders a bunch though, and the first three really are pretty much equal in my eyes, with Last Crusade being maybe a smidge better than the other two

Short Round was a fucking badass though

Fridge scene never bothered me.

Indy 4 would be so much better without marion + mud.

They were clearly trying to set up "la buff" as le nu indy.

I love that song desu

true about "la buff"

also, I can't stand those scenes that play out like extended video games like the truck chase through the jungle with all the vine swinging and the ant pillars; it's all just a waste of time...

>the only thing that bothered me about the fridge scene was "How did he get out?" since there were all those kids' deaths back in the day playing hide-and-seek and getting suffocated by hiding in those antique refrigerators.

The troubles coming when you compare it to Raiders, but that´s because Raiders is an exceptional film. Temple is good, but is goofy, in a good or bad way, depending or what are you expectiong

>short round is annoying
>Willie is annoying
>mythological background is bullshit
>archeological background is bullshit
>no serious/hurry tone
>no Nazi enemies
>feels more like a comedy
>the most bullshit scene on the series, raft over the mountain (until the fridge)
>betrayed the tone of Raiders
>too dark
>everything happens in one place
>half of the film happens in the caves or palace
>forced romantic situations.
>Mola Ram is an awful villian compared to the rest of the saga
>Indy is les charismatic here.
>poor ending compared to the original one

I think Lucas tried to make Temple a new Empire, dark, gore, horro elements, but lacks of depth. Even Spielberg says is the least favorite of the original trilogy

couldn't have said it better.
thanks.

last crusade is unironically my favorite film ever

>last crusade
>raiders
>temple
>aids
>ayyylmao

The fridge door lock was broken off when he landed.

???

cockney guy was a pretty good baddie as was Nazi lady and henchman.
.
Thinking about it now, maybe if indy had a hot young daughter it would've been a better movie.

Why are you excluding Crystal Skull? It IS in fact the worst of the series.

>short round is annoying
I cant disagree harder
>most bullshit scene raft down the mountains
I... i think i honestly blocked that out. Yes
>Mola Ram sucks
True

Ive always liked the British India scene though.

India...na Jones

Sup Forums please leave

If that wasn't an example of Lucas showcasing how bizzaringly out of touch he is, I don't know what else...
>Literally thought the UFO was meant as a joke

mola ram is badass.

black magic voodoo heart tricks
secret escape doors.
controls a small army of mind controlled indians
creepy laugh
has kids slave labour for him.
uses his own men as weapons, throwing them at indy.
doesn't give a fuck basically.

Thanks; I didn't catch that the lock got busted... only saw it once on a TV recording half-heartedly.

>hot daughter would've been way better than "la beef"... hell, even "la beef's" co-star from Transformers would've been a better choice for that movie (4).

They were going to give Indy a daughter (maybe was even going to be Blanchett) but Speilberg said he already did a daughter story with JP2 so that was out (fucking idiot)

Thing is... it could've been an inside joke since Star Wars and Close Encounters of the 3rd kind came out pretty much simultaneously. Both entirely different kinds of movies. I'd like to think that is the case (joke) just to make the medicine go down easier.

The chinky lad is annoying as shite as is the love interest too

In paper, the UFO thing is not a bad idea.
I think Crystal Skull is more Spielberg than Lucas fault. Indiana Jones films always a naturalistic photography and action/scenes. Even if most of the script feels cartoony, even Temple of doom make it feels "realistic"

Crystal Skull feels so digital (bloom everywhere), rushed and disconected of all the visual elements that make great the first trilogy than hurts the whole movie. The UFO thing could be bullshit but becomes even more bullshit thanks to the poor direction.

They should adapt Fate of Atlantis instead

>tfw it's a prequel
>tfw Indy says this in Raiders

What were they thinking.

The UFU thing was explicitly Lucas, based on one of their original drafts for a 4th film that Spielberg thought was too stupid 30 years ago.

I don't know what happened to change his mind, maybe lost a bet...

The "Interdimensional" craft taking off is really cool.

john hurt -Like taking a brush to their footprints.

>I don't know what happened to change his mind
2012 ancient aliens hype.

>2012

>>everything happens in one place
this is what bothered me the most and I'm not even some adhd mong who has to be stimulated with new impressions at all times
Raiders and Last Crusade just felt more like an actual adventure and you got a better feeling for the progression of their mission.
In ToD it was just india and indians all the time. And indians make for really bad villains because they are not intimidating at all. I mean their biggest revolution was fought by doing next to nothing at all. It's impressive but sitll, what the fuck?

The insane asylum shit was cool.

>low-key human sacrifices
Nigger rips their hearts out with his bare hands.

indy goes to afrika is best

bcuz plebs cant objectively watch the one with connery. its a cringefest. go watch again.

and then it BURSTS INTO FLAME still in his hand. hardcore.

Is that ever explained or are we to assume he is legit magic?

>tfw you actaually enjoy The Adventures of Young Indiana Jones

It's probably cuz I'm younger, I don't care if it's moderately terrible it's interesting seeing the origins of Indy and him fighting in ww1 and being a spy

ancient alien technology.

For me its tied with Last Crusade with Raiders being better than both, however Temple of Doom easily had the best costume and set designs and was definitely an interesting departure from the atmosphere of Raiders.

Bait?

Why does he wear the fisherman jacket?

I like that Temple of Doom is smaller in scale compared to the other 2, It has a nice haunted house vibe

I haven't seen last crusade in years, but saw raiders and temple in the last couple weeks, so i'll compare raiders and temple.

I'd say the biggest factor is the pacing. Raiders has this rolling-boulder like momentum that makes indy movies so much fun. From the moment it opens, we're on a wild ride wondering how we'll get the next clue, and where it will lead us on our globe-hopping adventure. Temple, on the other hand, has an extended cold-open that tries to blend into the later adventure with the plane scene, but once indy and the gang exit the plane, their adventure is essentially over. Indy decides, however, to go to the palace and find the stone. Once he finds his way through the caves, and we've watched the ceremony a lot of the mystery disappears. Then it's just a matter of Indy breaking out of his cell, beating up some dudes, breaking the voodoo curses, and getting the stone(s) back to the village. Raiders really keeps you guessing the whole time, whereas Temple keeps you guessing between hearing about the palace, and getting into the caves, and that's about it.

You could argue that Raider's cold open also breaks the momentum, but i would disagree. The Raiders opening sets up the marcus rivalry and indy's dislike of snakes, it is the perfect length, has the unforgettable 'start the plane!' scene, and once indy gets back to his college he is immediately swept up on another adventure. Whereas in Temple of Doom, it sets up willie and short round (although neither are very deep), has the completely forgettable "anything goes" opening and car chase, a pretty good something-on-the-ground-in-a-crowded-area' gag, and that's about it. Raiders opening is one of the best character introductions in the history of film, it flows right into his next adventure after a 5 minute stopover at Cambridge and it shows how cut-throat the archeology game is. In Temple Indy looks incompetent: his friend gets killed, he takes a hostage and he gets poisoned. Not exactly as epic.

Does anyone else like Last Crusade the least of the original three? I did a revisit of the trilogy two years ago and Temple's far and above my favorite now, with Last Crusade being my least favorite to the point I almost had trouble getting through it. The oddest part is since childhood up til that rewatch it was always my favorite one.

We need to go back to Nazis chasing Judeo-Christian artifacts.

I love Temple of Doom. I hate when they tried to unfairly make the National Socialists into the bad guys.

It opens with a musical number, in and Indiana Jones film

>children in action scenes
Is a major factor too

>forgetting about HA HA! Nice try, Lao Che!

>I like that Temple of Doom is smaller in scale compared to the other 2, It has a nice haunted house vibe

It's like what Indy does in his spare time

It's my favorite actually. It was the first one I watched as a kid and it both scared me and entertained me.

Because it has dirty fecking indians in it.
And their disgusting food, grotty insects crawling in filth, starving indian children being beaten.

AND WILLY, FUCKING WILLY!.

Basically it's too close to reality and that's not what an indiana jones film should be about.