HCR Rates The Movies #71: INDIANA JONES AND THE... [Archive]

DTM

08/22/2006, 14:00

So, our next film, Classic or Crud, Hit or Miss, what say you ALL?

Our next film open for discussion, and ultimately an Overall RATING by you all:

INDIANA JONES AND THE
TEMPLE OF DOOM
O4zD6Nm_ce4

Let the discussions flow. Likes, dislikes, classic film or overhyped trash, and DONT FORGET to place an Overall Rating when youre done.

Its easy, just give a Rating from 1 (Jaws 4:The Revenge) to 10 (Jaws), and thats it. Course I'd love to have you all give reasons as to why you feel it deserves this Overall Rating, and more than encourage discussions with us all about them.

So, what say you all?

Next Film: ??????

Grinner

08/22/2006, 16:20

Worst of the Indiana Jones movies. The plot doesn't have the mainline that the other two have and the supporting cast is annoying. Still, even a bad Indiana Jones movie is a good movie ;)

7.5

DTM

08/23/2006, 13:30

Im going to agree with you on that in almost every way G. The Temple of Doom was my least favorite of the Indiana Jones trilogy, though when it came out and I was 12, Im sure I was Stoked to see anything regarding our favorite adventuring archeologist.

I enjoyed Indiana as much as I always do, though to me, the supporting cast, especially Willie Scott, was damn annoying. It seemed every other line in the film for her was SCREAM! (truth be told, Short Round wasnt SO bad, though Willie was so much so it leached onto him) :)

Still, any chance to see Dr. Jones on screen is well worth it, and while this wasnt my favorite Indy film, it was still a fun viewing nonetheless (and it did help create the PG-13 rating system). Not the best of the trilogy to me, but still an enjoyable action movie nonetheless.

Indiana Jones And The Temple Of Doom - 8.25

torontcollectr

08/23/2006, 16:50

Like most (we suspect)- we will call this the weakest of the 3. The first had it all (10 easy), the last (Last Crusade) had Sean Connery and while different from the other 2 was highly enjoyable and sparkled. Temple of Doom by comparison seems weak- however when compared with your average theatre fair -it easily surpasses them. How about a 7.5?

Maniac_nmt

08/23/2006, 18:21

DTM

08/23/2006, 20:25

While the first of the 3 that was filmed, it came out as the second film (and for good reason). The plot was weak, and the gore un-neccesary (seemed more like lets try and gross you out then anything).

The first Indy movie was good, and Last Crusade was good. Temple of Doom, not so good.

4/10

Ouch! I mean, we all agree the ToD was the worst of the Indy films, but a 4? Thats a pretty low score......but then again, I think you did rate Raiders Of The Lost Ark around a 7, so I guess that fits. :)

Trader2699

08/23/2006, 22:21

Still liked it better than Last Crusade, which I felt got a little slapsticky. People eating snakes and bugs = always a bonus.

Mola Ram inspired so many D&D villains there's no way I can rate this below 7.

The little Asian kid driving with blocks on his feet = kick###.

8.25

Mjolnir

08/24/2006, 01:23

Sometimes the stunts went on too long.........
Still, I liked the darker tone for the movie as a whole..... was it as good as the 1st one? NO, more like banana pudding sitting next to apple pie with a nice red velvet cake waiting to be brough out to the table.......
I liked it and with repeated viewing it is interesting......
9.25(behind the 9.5 and 9.75 for the other two.)

the itsy bit

08/24/2006, 05:16

worst of the 3 although the the mine car ride was cool, so it's a 7/10

Maniac_nmt

08/24/2006, 16:14

Ouch! I mean, we all agree the ToD was the worst of the Indy films, but a 4? Thats a pretty low score......but then again, I think you did rate Raiders Of The Lost Ark around a 7, so I guess that fits. :)

I told you, just because I like a film, doesn't mean it gets a 10 rating.

Flash Gordon is one of my favorite films, and I think I only gave it an 8 something.

I love Tron and the Rocketeer, but neither of those got 10s from me.

Which is what I was refering to with Starwars. No matter how much I love it, it is NOT a 10 or even a 9 film. The acting is horrible in many parts. While it may have changed filming as we know it, it is not the complete package.

DTM

08/24/2006, 17:50

I told you, just because I like a film, doesn't mean it gets a 10 rating.

Flash Gordon is one of my favorite films, and I think I only gave it an 8 something.

I love Tron and the Rocketeer, but neither of those got 10s from me.

Which is what I was refering to with Starwars. No matter how much I love it, it is NOT a 10 or even a 9 film. The acting is horrible in many parts. While it may have changed filming as we know it, it is not the complete package.

You realize the entire basis for these Rate The Movies threads is to post what you feel these movies rate to you, right? So in fact, your favorite films should be rated HIGH, for you here, and likewise even if a movie is a Classic, if you didnt like it personally, rate it low.

These threads are based on what we would rate these movies, based on how much we loved or hated them, not simply based on whether AFI believes it to be great or not. Lord knows Im voting as such, and Im pretty sure the rest of us are too.

Also, if you look up Star Wars on most every single movie review listing pretty much anywhere, ever, youll see its at a perfect or near perfect score on just about every single one of them.

Maniac_nmt

08/25/2006, 08:28

You realize the entire basis for these Rate The Movies threads is to post what you feel these movies rate to you, right? So in fact, your favorite films should be rated HIGH, for you here, and likewise even if a movie is a Classic, if you didnt like it personally, rate it low.

These threads are based on what we would rate these movies, based on how much we loved or hated them, not simply based on whether AFI believes it to be great or not. Lord knows Im voting as such, and Im pretty sure the rest of us are too.

Also, if you look up Star Wars on most every single movie review listing pretty much anywhere, ever, youll see its at a perfect or near perfect score on just about every single one of them.

Yes, I totally realise that.

Oh, and who cares if Starwars is rated that high everywhere. Titanic got rave reviews by everyone too. Did that make it a good movie?

DTM

08/25/2006, 14:40

Yes, I totally realise that.

Oh, and who cares if Starwars is rated that high everywhere. Titanic got rave reviews by everyone too. Did that make it a good movie?

Actually, I loved Titanic. :)

And my point with Star Wars was that just because you dont think it was deserving of a 10 or even a 9 doesnt mean it wasnt, as near countless movie reviewers, professional and HCR member alike, have rated it as such since it came out. It IS an iconic movie, not just for what it was on screen, but what it did off screen as well.

But hey, different strokes and all that, I get it. :)

DTM

08/25/2006, 14:42

CURRENT HCR MEMBER RATING:

INDIANA JONES AND THE TEMPLE OF DOOM - 7.39 / 10

(7 member rating........come on now, surely more than 7 of us have seen the blockbuster sequel to one of the greatest Action/Adventure movies Of All Time) :)

Gargantua

08/25/2006, 21:52

I agree with what most everyone's said here. It's the worst of the three movies with the weakest supporting cast. Far less memorable than the others. Not awful. Just not great by any means. 6 of 10.

Inbetweener

08/26/2006, 09:58

I have to disagree with the status quo here...I thought the Last Crusade was an inferior film...actually by a long shot; from it's concept, acting and overall silly shenanigans. Temple of Doom didn't exactly blow me away either and certainly had it's silly moments but overall it was quite exciting, original and memorable.

Rating: 8.25

Drunky

10/03/2006, 18:10

Maniac_nmt

10/06/2006, 18:11

Definitely the worst of the three for me. I think producers were like: "The first one made big money, let's make another one. Don't need to care about the story, just make it exotic, like going to India for example. What's scary about India? I dunno. Wait there is Thuggee, let's try it. You know about it? No. Don't care. Also add a stupid blonde and an asiatic sidekick, it's always cool. OK we have it all, let's do it then." The movie is still entertaining, with some funny scenes (and a lot of ridiculous ones), but it's quite enjoyable, although Kali wouldn't like it I guess :p.
6.25/10.

Actually, Temple of Doom is the first of the franchise. It was filmed and produced, and they realised the content was to much for the year they wanted to release it in.

Raiders of the Lost arc was actually filmed after Temple of Doom, but was released before it.

DTM

10/06/2006, 18:14

Actually, Temple of Doom is the first of the franchise. It was filmed and produced, and they realised the content was to much for the year they wanted to release it in.

Raiders of the Lost arc was actually filmed after Temple of Doom, but was released before it.

I dont think this is so Maniac, as several action idea they had for Raiders didnt make that movie, so were put into the ToD instead. ToD was a prequel to Raiders Of The Lost Ark in terms of the stories dates, but I believe Raiders was the first film they made (and this after watching all 3 movies Makings Of a few days back from the DVD set, where no where did they mention they thought of and film ToD before RotLA)

Maniac_nmt

10/06/2006, 18:46

I dont think this is so Maniac, as several action idea they had for Raiders didnt make that movie, so were put into the ToD instead. ToD was a prequel to Raiders Of The Lost Ark in terms of the stories dates, but I believe Raiders was the first film they made (and this after watching all 3 movies Makings Of a few days back from the DVD set, where no where did they mention they thought of and film ToD before RotLA)

I dunno, I used to have a big Indiana Jones buff for a friend, and that's what he always told me.

Drunky

10/06/2006, 18:49

Well, I didn't know that, Maniac_nmt, and after reading DTM's post I can't say who's right between you 2, but that doesn't change my POV on this movie anyway. It is still way worse than RotLA for me, and if you're right my comment was misplaced for sure, but I won't change my rating. I still think the story was poor (even without comparing its to the other ones), the chick was unbearable and I don't enjoy this one as much as I enjoy the first and third ones.

Gentlegamer

10/06/2006, 18:50

Even a "crappy" Indiana Jones film is far superior to most films: 10

DTM

10/06/2006, 20:49

Even a "crappy" Indiana Jones film is far superior to most films: 10

With the exception of your rating for this film, I agree with you 100%.

Sigdr

10/06/2006, 21:44

The weakest of the three films, perhaps, but it still features Harrison Ford and his rugged jawline.

Plus, as Trader mentioned, the villain is definitely iconic.

8.25

DTM

10/06/2006, 23:08

The weakest of the three films, perhaps, but it still features Harrison Ford and his rugged jawline.

Plus, as Trader mentioned, the villain is definitely iconic.

8.25

Mola Ram is an Iconic movie villain?

Sigdr

10/07/2006, 02:12

Mola Ram is an Iconic movie villain?

Mm. Not iconic in himself, but his influence reaches into many places.

iameleveneight

10/01/2007, 15:38

7/10 This movie does a lot that I like but all in all I find this the least entertaining of the three movies. I love the opening scene and everybody has to love the part where he pulls the guys heart out, but for my money I think this is the least interesting of all of the Indy movies.

DTM

10/02/2007, 01:22

8/10 Its Indiana Jones, this time with his DAD played by Sean Connery. Thats just genius in casting right there. Yeah its not as good as Raiders, but its better than Temple. I never liked Temple as much, it always seemed kinda boring compared to the other two.

OK, Im lost....isnt THIS thread for Temple Of Doom? :)