Re: How Come Temple's Got a Bad Rap?

Posted by Michaelson from em11-686.utsi.edu on October 05, 1998 at 09:22:12:

In Reply to: How Come Temple's Got a Bad Rap? posted by Andrea on October 04, 1998 at 10:34:12:

: Am I one of the few that believe Temple of Doom is arguably the best
: in the series? Most completely disagree with me, which is perfectly
: allright.

: Still, I find Temple to be *ultimate* Indy: Ford isn't as wooden, the
: action is larger than life (as it should be), the tone lighter (I
: feel Raiders was taking itself a bit too seriously), the
: characters humorous and the locations most exotic of the series.
: Not to mention the risks Speilberg took with this one. I just hate to hear Speilberg apologizing for this entry in the series ["show a little backbone, will ya'?!"]

: Crusade, by comparison, was quite a reactionary response to those
: who didn't like Temple; in my opinion, it was extremely conservative
: and thus by the numbers. It was safe. And this was the film experience
: that convinced me to be a filmmaker!

: Of course, Raiders started it all, and it's fabulous. But like I pointed out, I felt the tone was just a bit too serious. Hey, we're talking pulp here! Don't get me wrong, I love Indy, but it seems Temple always, unjustifiably, gets the bad rap.

: -Andrea

: P.S. For those of you not familiar with Pauline Kael, the former film critic for the New Yorker, I would strongly suggest you check out her review on Temple. It hits the nail on the head, in my opinion, and truly does the film critical justice.

Hi Andrea. I have a warm spot for T of D, simply because I had a lot going on in my life at that time that I remember when that movie came out. It was also the first of the blitz of after market products that LucasFilm released as the movie came out. You'll find a ton of T of D items on the traders market, from lunch boxes to books to posters to, well, you get the idea. It was the first movie I ever went to that I had ever experienced surround sound, and that was VERY interesting. It was also the Indy movie that Lucas had a direct personal hand in directing the action and terms of the character development. Basically, it didn't work with Indy fans, but according to books and literature, it was Lucas's direct attempt to show Indy as HE wanted Indy to appear on screen. It didn't work to his expectation, as Raiders had already created the benchmark that all sequels would be compared to. It definately isn't Raiders, but I remember quite a while back a question was asked by a forum member that wasn't fielded by anyone...If Temple had come out first, would there be the stir for Indy that there is at this moment? A very good question. Regards. Michaelson

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup:

Name:    
E-Mail:  
Subject: 
Comments:

: : Am I one of the few that believe Temple of Doom is arguably the best
: : in the series? Most completely disagree with me, which is perfectly 
: : allright.

: : Still, I find Temple to be *ultimate* Indy: Ford isn't as wooden, the
: : action is larger than life (as it should be), the tone lighter (I
: : feel Raiders was taking itself a bit too seriously), the 
: : characters humorous and the locations most exotic of the series. 
: : Not to mention the risks Speilberg took with this one. I just hate to hear Speilberg apologizing for this entry in the series ["show a little backbone, will ya'?!"]

: : Crusade, by comparison, was quite a reactionary response to those
: : who didn't like Temple; in my opinion, it was extremely conservative 
: : and thus by the numbers. It was safe. And this was the film experience
: : that convinced me to be a filmmaker!

: : Of course, Raiders started it all, and it's fabulous. But like I pointed out, I felt the tone was just a bit too serious. Hey, we're talking pulp here! Don't get me wrong, I love Indy, but it seems Temple always, unjustifiably, gets the bad rap.

: : -Andrea

: : P.S. For those of you not familiar with Pauline Kael, the former film critic for the New Yorker, I would strongly suggest you check out her review on Temple. It hits the nail on the head, in my opinion, and truly does the film critical justice.

: Hi Andrea. I have a warm spot  for T of D, simply because I had a lot going on in my life at that time that I remember when that movie came out. It was also the first of the blitz of after market products that LucasFilm released as the movie came out. You'll find a ton of T of D items on the traders market, from lunch boxes to books to posters to, well, you get the idea. It was the first movie I ever went to that I had ever experienced surround sound, and that was VERY interesting. It was also the Indy movie that Lucas had a direct personal hand in directing the action and terms of the character development. Basically, it didn't work with Indy fans, but according to books and literature, it was Lucas's direct attempt to show Indy as HE wanted Indy to appear on screen. It didn't work to his expectation, as Raiders had already created the benchmark that all sequels would be compared to. It definately isn't Raiders, but I remember quite a while back a question was asked by a forum member that wasn't fielded by anyone...If Temple had come out first, would there be the stir for Indy that there is at this moment? A very good question. Regards. Michaelson

Optional:

Link URL:   
Link Title: 
Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The Indyfan Forum ] [ FAQ ]