Thoughts On: Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom

"Hey Geekboy!"  You say.  "If you're doing the Indiana Jones movies, shouldn't you start with 'Raiders of the Lost Ark?  Hmm?  The first movie in the franchise?  Hmm?"

Firstly, 'Temple of Doom' is the first one I saw - from start to finish anyway.  I saw part of 'Raiders' on TV when I was 4 or 5, but Mum and Dad thought it was too adult for me and changed the channel.  And rightly so.  I would go on to see 'Temple of Doom' at age 12 during my obsession with the Orient Expedition Lego comics and games.  Johnny Thunder is more or less an Australian version of Dr. Jones so he was the proper stepping stone to the movies.

Secondly, the title card tells us 'Temple of Doom' takes place in 1935, one year before 'Raiders of the Lost Ark'.  Yep, technically speaking 'Temple of Doom' is a prequel.

Oh yeah.  Spoilers I guess, if you haven't seen 'Temple of Doom', but you probably have.

George Lucas and Steven Spielberg wanted to get down to the nitty gritty of what made Indiana tick in this movie.  This version of Indiana was supposed to start at a place of 'If I can't have the Ark of the Covenant, nobody can!' and would have blown it sky high rather then let the Nazis have it.  He's just out for Fortune and Glory.  Over the course of the story he is supposed to grow into the more respectable archeologist from 'Raiders'.

There's a bit of a disconnect though, because young Indiana in 'Last Crusade' starts off as a literal boy-scout.  How do you go from "That belongs in a Museum!" to "Some say Dr. Jones is more Grave Robber than Archeologist..."  I suppose you could say the Indiana could have become disgruntled and bitter after losing the Cross of Coronado ("You lost today kid, but you don't have to like it.") and turned to the archeologist Dark Side.

In some ways 'Temple of Doom' gives us the most selfless version of Indiana.  Ironic, because they were trying to make him at his most roguish.  This Indiana is the father figure to Short Round, a young orphan boy who tried to rob him, and the protector of a woman he just met.  True, he more or less kidnapped Willie in the beginning for selfish reasons, but hey, she had the antidote when he was dying.  You'd do the same.

Then he comes to an impoverished village in need of a champion of justice while he's just passing through, and decides to help only after he hears about all of the children in the village who had been carried away as slaves.  Because he's just in it for the fortune and glory.  Right Indiana.

In all of the other movies his motivation revolves around a personal interest in how the adventure turns out.  True, he's recruited by the government in 'Raiders of the Lost Ark' but the possibility of seeing his Ex girlfriend Marion Ravenwood again is a definite perk.  In 'The Last Crusade' he has no interest in finding the Holy Grail until he finds out that his estranged Father disappeared looking for it.  And then in 'Kingdom of the Crystal Skull' - yes I do consider 'Crystal Skull' cannon, I like that movie! - He's trying to protect his reputation when he's accused of being a Communist sympathizer.

All of those motives make sense.  It's not actually selfish to look out for people you care about or protect your reputation - I remember my Grandma saying that sometimes all you have is your good name.  But to try and help people you've just met?  That's an undeniably selfLESS act.  'Temple of Doom' plays out like an episode of 'The Lone Ranger!'  The Lone Ranger and Tonto ride into a new town, see that it's run by a corrupt mayor, or held hostage by a gang of outlaws, then they save the day and ride off with a "High Ho Silver!" leaving the good townsfolk to ask "Who was that masked man anyway?"

When they reach the titular temple of doom Indiana has an opportunity to grab the Sankara stones and scram.  He doesn't because he hears one of the slave children crying out in anguish.  Indiana investigates, and impulsively throws a rock at the Thugee guard whipping the boy.  Because this selfish rouge sticks up for the little guy.  This act - selfless though it may be - causes Indiana and the gang to be captured by the cultists.  Yep, our hero helps those in need regardless of the consequences.  That greedy selfish nature his character has is really shining through.  Indiana is forced to drink a potion that makes him an evil zombie cultist.  Short Round is forced to work in the mines with the other slaves.  And Willie?  She's about to be scarified to Kali.  Time out from the review for a second.

In the part where Indy and Short Round are rescuing Willie from the sacrifice Spielberg does something Spielberg does so well.  He has an action scene that is really intense and really funny.  Willie is being lowered into a flaming pit.  Our heroes come along, stop that bad guy lowering the cage, and start to pull her back up.  More bad guys attack Indiana, and the cage starts lowering again.  Repeat.  Several times.  And it's hilarious.

Spielberg does something similar in 'The Adventures of Tintin' with the sword-fight between Sir Francis Haddock and Red Rackham.  Haddock is trying to blow up the ship and all of the pirates on it.  He sets a really long fuse leading to all the ship's gunpowder.  Rackham discovers him and they get into a big swashbuckling fight.  Red Rackham stomps on the fuse.  Haddock finds a way to re-light it -breaking a lantern or something -  and they keep fighting.  They go through this several times, and each time Haddock re-lights the fuse you laugh as your heart rate increases.

So they have a big fight, free all the slaves, and then try to escape in the big mine car chase.  I think the movie actually has a bit of action fatigue by this point.  There's that part with the flooded tunnel that Lucas and Spielburg borrowed from the 1941 serial 'Jungle Girl' and then more fighting once they escape the tunnels.  There's a hilarious call back to 'Raiders' where Indiana is confronted by two swordsmen and reaches for his gun.  BUT HIS HOLSTER IS EMPTY.  He lost his trusty revolver in that car chase all the way back in the beginning of the movie.  We get a little bit of a taste of that planned sword-fight that they cut from 'Raiders'.

Then we have the famous bridge sequence.  Even though lots of jungle movies and serials from back in the day - 'Gunga Din' and 'Perils of Nyoka' come to mind - have a collapsing suspension bridge, if you try to do one now everybody will point and say "Temple of Doom! They got that from Temple of Doom!"

Here we have a scene that mirrors the ultimatum from 'Raiders of the Lost Ark' where Indy threatens to blow up the Ark of the Covenant and Rene Belloq calls his bluff.  Indiana first threatens to drop the stones into the river were they'll be lost again.  When his bluff is called by Mola Ram, he changes his approach.  Now he threatens to cut the bridge and take as many of the cultists with him as he can.  Big fight, he cuts the bridge, and he and Mola Ram fight over the Sankara stones.  Two are lost, but he manages to save the third for the villagers.

At this point in  the story Willie finally calls him out for pretending he isn't being selfless.  "So much for your Fortune and Glory!"

Wait a minute. Wait a minute. WAIT! A!! MINUTE!!!

I only just realized something after years of watching and re-watching this movie.  In the opening Indiana threatens to kill Willie unless Lao Che will give him a valuable diamond.  This is a reflection of the bridge scene but FLIPPED!  On the bridge Indy is bargaining with Mola Ram to let Willie and Short Round or he'll drop the stones into the river.  In the first scenario it's a life for the diamond, in the second it's the Sankara stones for a life.  I can't believe I never noticed that parallel.  So this movie DOES show us a good bit of character growth after all.

So there you have it.  'Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom'.  A movie that shows us Indiana Jones at his worst and may just give us Indiana Jones at his best.

On Villains...

 

We love to hate 'em.

I watch the show Grimm.  In the first season, Adalind Schade made my skin crawl.  By the end of season two, I was cheering every time she was on screen.  Sure she was evil, but she was also really cool and funny!  I realized that I loved to hate her.  And I loved loving to hate her.  She's one of my favorite characters now.

I've been doing lots of research on the great villains of classic British crime novels.  Ian Fleming's Ernst Stavro Blofeld, Sax Rohmer's Fu Manchu, and Sapper's Carl and Irma Peterson of James Bond, Fu Manchu, and Bulldog Drummond fame.

My fascination with villains makes sense when you think about it.  I read comics, and great Superheroes need to have great villains.  Captain America has The Red Skull, Daredevil has both Kingpin and Bullseye, and of course Batman has Joker.

But my fascination with the arch nemesis goes back further than my reading of comic books.  Here are two of the first villains I loved hating.


First we have Lord Sinister.


Created by the Lego company in 1998, Lord Sinister was the primary antagonist for Johnny Thunder, Pippin Reed and Dr. Killroy of 'The Adventurers' toys and online comics.  Lord Sinister was know by different names over the years, and also depending on the country the stories were published in (All of the characters went through name changes.  In some countries, Pippin Reed and Dr. Killroy were know  as Gail Storm and Dr. Lightning).  Lord Sinister's aliases include Baron von Barron, and Mr. Hates.  I came onboard rather late in the series, with 2003's 'Orient Expedition,' So He'll always be 'Lord Sinister' to me.

Johnny Thunder is a thrill seeking Adventurer and Treasure Hunter from Australia.  He, Dr. Killroy, and Miss Pippin Reed, a photographer for World Magazine, travel to exotic locals in search of treasure to 'Put in a museum, where everyone can see it!'  While searching for treasure they usually found ways to protect the downtrodden and right wrongs and all that good stuff.  But you can bet that Lord Sinister will be close behind, allowing our heroes to do all the hard work, just to steal the treasure out from under their noses and put in his private collection.  Or at least he'll try.  Usually he'll end up triggering some kind of booby-trap, allowing our heroes to nab the treasure.




So, Lord Sinister isn't the most evil villain in the world.  He's a Snidely Whiplash type who wouldn't be out of place in a silent melodrama.  But he was a lot of fun and will always have a special place in my heart.



The other is Murdoc, Played by Michael Des Barres, in the hit 80's TV show MacGyver.  I was pretty much MacGyver's biggest fan, ever since I was first introduced to the show somewhere between the ages of 9 and 12 all the way through my teen years.  Murdoc was introduced as a master-of-disguise assassin, working for the organization-of-evil H.I.T. who has a vendetta against Mac and his buddy Peter Thornton.  He 'dies' at the end of every episode he's in, but is always back for the next season.  He's been blown up, fallen off cliffs, submerged in underground lakes of boiling oil, and fallen into snake pits.  Usually his last words are "MAC-GYYYY-VAAAAAAAA---!" shouted at the top of his lungs.





Murdoc's character evolves quite a bit over the course of the show.  He goes from from maniac-with-a-flame-thrower in Season 3, to a tormented Phantom of the Opera type character in the Season 4 episode 'Cleo Rocks'.  He and MacGyver even call a truce and team up in Season 5's 'Halloween Knights'.

You don't want Murdoc to win and kill MacGyver, per say, but you really don't want MacGyver to ever CATCH Murdoc either.  You like that their never ending chess-match is a stalemate.  And really, that's the way it should be.