History Headscratchers / IndianaJonesAndTheTempleOfDoom

** It never exactly came up in dialogue, but she was really just dragged along without resistance once things turned bad at the club. Note that she's not in any way an ActionGirl like Marion; she's a total diva, and would need somone streetwise and tough like Indy to protect her from the gangsters. If they weren't intending to kill Willie, she probably thought they were, and in any event they were so reckless and trigger-happy she probably figured running away with Jones was the safest option. The whole group made things up as they went once the deal went sour; no time to think or plan ahead, just roll.
** Because Indy had ordered three airline tickets: for himself, Short Round, and Wu Han. Even though Wu Han died, Indy's not going to waste that third seat, dammit!

*** And no reason for Mola Ram to try the same trick ''on'' Indy when they were hanging from the bridge, if it was just an illusion. Trying to physically pull him off the bridge would've been more effective that using a scare-tactic on a man who'd just had the balls to cut the bridge he, himself, was standing on.

** Possibly they only removed the hearts of people who were believers in the Hindu faith? A non-believer's heart might not be considered worthy to be offered up separately.

** My interpretation is that Mola Ram never actually pulled anybody's heart out of anybody's body --It was all mass suggestion. Mass hypnosis, if you want to call it that. During the first sacrifice, we are shown what those present think they are seeing. During the second (attempted) sacrifice, we see what really happens (Mola Ram doing as if he is holding aloft a beating heart, when if fact he isn't). At the end of the movie, I interpret what Mola Ram tries to do to Indy on the remains of the rope bridge as an attempt at suggestion, perhaps inducing a heart attack or something.

** It never exactly came up in dialogue, but she was really just dragged along without resistance once things turned bad at the club. Note that she's not in any way an ActionGirl like Marion; she's a total diva, and would need somone streetwise and tough like Indy to protect her from the gangsters. If they weren't intending to kill Willie, she probably thought they were, and in any event they were so reckless and trigger-happy she probably figured running away with Jones was the safest option. The whole group made things up as they went once the deal went sour; no time to think or plan ahead, just roll.

* Basically the entire movie. I'm sure it's been brought up before, but I'm a history geek, and in all my years of reading (and some added research after seeing this film) I have yet to come across any evidence that the Thugee cult was nothing more than a figment of British imagination, cooked up to spread news of the so-called "Wild" India, the taming of which was the White Man's Burden, which was the Crown's excuse for all the atrocities they committed on Indian soil until 1947. Throughout its story the film creates a misogynistic, perverted view of the country and presents it as "Historically Researched" reality. More examples of half-assed bullshit:
** In Hinduism, Kali is NOT the Goddess Of Death, and there's actually ''no such thing'' as a Goddess Of Death. There is a ''God'' of Death, Yama, who happens to be a ''he'', but Yama does not look like a scary Grim Reaper, and neither does he actually ''bring'' death; he simply carries the souls of the fallen to the Afterlife. Spielberg and Lucas seem to have picked Kali solely because the Goddess is depicted as a warrior (which makes sense since her real role in Hinduic Mythology is as The Punisher Of Evil) and it was easy for them to present that as Evil.
** The year is 1935. The Pinnacle of British Rule. The Crown's heavy taxes are bleeding the country dry, making the English richer and richer while the farmers of Indian villages get poorer and poorer. On one such village, three white men arrive one morning, and the villagers' ''first'' impression is that they are '''''saviors sent to them by Gods'''''? I'd use a lot of four-letter words here to describe Spielberg, but I'm trying not to go into personal attacks.
*** I think with this one, the idea wasn't that "any white men arriving are sent by the Gods" so much as Indiana Jones ''specifically'' was prophesied as coming to save them.
*** Short Round's white??!!!
** And to top it all, it's the British riflemen who come to be TheCavalry at the end of the film. So basically what Spielberg is saying is, India is full of people who are either psychotic child-murderers, or dirt-poor villagers who are the victims of said Psychotic Murderers, who have to saved by the [[MightyWhitey White Man]]. [[SarcasmMode Oh, what a wonderful, wonderful message!]]
*** Well since the British had disarmed the Indian people in order to subdue them if someone was going to fight back with something better than rocks it would have to be the British soldiers.
*** Also, correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure those riflemen were not white.
** Officials of the Indian Government were shown the script, and because of the racist content turned down Spielberg's request to allow filming inside the national monument of Amber Fort. If changes were made to the script, however, permission would be given. Instead of doing his research, though (because that would just be too much WORK, wouldn't it?) The Great Spielberg decided he was above such petty things, and moved filming to '''''Sri Lanka'''''. Because hey, everyone from South Asia looks alike, right?
*** For most of these, you have to remember that IndianaJones ''is not supposed to be an accurate historical drama''. It's '''''fiction''''', and unabashedly so. It's meant to [[GeorgeLucasThrowback evoke the 1930s pulp adventure books]], where all of the stuff you're complaining about was commonplace and expected. Indiana Jones has never, ''ever'' been presented as "Historically Researched reality," and I honestly have no idea how you thought that was the case in a series that has ''the Ark of the Covenant melting Nazi faces''.
*** I agree with that answer, and neither was I implying that Indiana Jones was NOT fiction. I accept the [[MST3KMantra MST 3 K Mantra]], and admit that the previous rant might have gone a bit on the Wangstier side. It simply bugs me that a film series containing a movie with such outright racist material has such a fan base. And that Spielberg, a director whose talent I admire, sank to the level of making a film like this. Spielberg has since then grown positively hostile towards this movie, and admits that he hates it, but the damage is done.
*** The reason the series has such a fanbase is partly because, whatever failings ''Temple'' has, there are parts in the film itself as well as the other movies that more than make up for it and, frankly, because the vast majority of viewers aren't going to know or care about all the stuff you cited. Really, I've heard far more complaints about the movie just for being darker in tone than ''Raiders'' or ''Crusade''. And the reason I pointed out it was fiction (admittedly, I was a bit harsh in my tone), was because your opening said it "presents it as "Historically Researched" reality." You may have been exaggerating while in rant mode (lord knows I've done the same), but I could only work from what you said.
*** The trouble is that most of the rest of the series keeps up at least a pretense of taking place in the "real" counterparts of the times and places it's set in. Germany really ''was'' more or less the kind of place portrayed in ''Crusade''; the Middle East was at least sort of like the way it was shown in both ''Raiders'' and ''Crusade,'' if not exactly. But real India bore little or no resemblance to ''Temple of Doom'' India, which is an annoying shift in the tone and quality of the series. ''Temple of Doom'' is regarded as the low point of the series for a reason.
**** Bingo. That's exactly it. When you remember that history buffs and archeology majors alike are hardcore fans of the series because of its more or less on-the-spot portrayal of history, Temple of Doom falls so absurdly short it doesn't even get off the floor. Also, since it is pretty well-known that history buffs love the Indy movies for the aforementioned on-the-spot history, ''non'' history buffs sometimes simply take it for granted that '''ALL'' the Indy movies are historically accurate. Cue the [[ViewersAreMorons blind belief]] that people in India eat monkey-brains and worship death-godesses to bring about the end of the world.
**** ^^I would disagree with that argument. First of all, while ''some'' aspects of the portrayal of Germany in The Last Crusade were accurate, others were not. For instance, the first and third movies play into the pop culture theory that Hitler and the Nazis were extremely interested ("obsessed" is the word they use in Raiders) in occult rituals and artifacts, a notion that many historians have strongly criticized over the years as unfounded speculation. So the premise of Raiders and Crusade are just as much a break with reality as Temple of Doom (only people don't seem to mind it in the first and third movies because in those cases it's white people getting portrayed inaccurately). ^Well that's hardly the film-maker's fault, now is it? As far as I know Lucas and Spielberg have ''never'' gone on record claiming any of the Indiana Jones movies are historically accurate. If history buffs later took those movies and slapped them with a "historically accurate" label when they're not, then aren't ''they'' the ones at fault for creating a wrong impression among non-history buffs?
** You are all blaming the wrong guy. It's ''Lucas'' who decides beforehand what scenes will be in a movie, no matter what and even before there is a coherent plot, or otherwise he'll veto the production since he has the rights to the main character. In this case, he decided there would be a voodoo doll, a sacrifice and a bug dining among other things, while the preliminary idea was still setting the sequel in DarkestAfrica. Then came Huyck & Katz and changed it to their own exotic idea of India, presumably taken from the Raj Quartet novels of the 60s (where there are two locations named "Pankot" and "Mayapore", among other things). The previous voodoo-sacrifice-bug eating were impositions from above and had to be kept despite the change of setting.
** I have a couple (well, more than a couple) of problems with your argument.\\
1) The idea that the Thugee cult was ''completely'' made up or imagined by the British is simply false. Most historians who question the claims of a Thugee death cult still concede that groups of Thugs did exist over the centuries, they just weren't the vast organized conspiracy the British claimed they were. So in that regard Temple of Doom does the exact same thing the first and third movies do. Both Raiders and Crusade posit the existence of a secret conspiracy of individuals with a nefarious plan to seize control of an occult/religious artifact and use it to take over the world ([[MemeticMutation OF COURSE!]]). The Nazis may have been a real organization, but in reality there is no evidence that Hitler's alleged "obsession" with religious artifacts was anything other than an invention of the Allies and his political opponents. Some occult organizations existed in Germany during Hitler's regime but they were fringe movements and no evidence has yet arisen that they had anywhere near the influence or authority shown in Raiders or Crusade. Temple of Doom follows this exact same formula, only replace "Germany" with "India" and "German occult groups" with "a secret Thugee death cult".\\
2) Your argument regarding the goddess Kali is...not entirely accurate. While Kali is officially considered the goddess of time and change, she is still strongly associated with death in many forms of Hinduism. Many of her portrayals are very dark and violent and one of her titles is "She who destroys". And it must be mentioned that Hinduism has MANY different variations and sub-groups, and each of those groups have very different interpretations of the Hindu pantheon. So saying "Kali isn't the goddess of death" is only accurate depending on which branch of Hinduism you're referring to. (As a side note, offhand I don't recall Kali ever being referred to as the Hindu goddess of death in the movie, but that may just be my own memory failing me.) Also recall that the Thugee cult presented in Temple of Doom is ''explicitly stated'' to be an underground fringe movement that has rejected the teachings of other branches of Hinduism ("You betray Shiva!"). I've seen many movies, books, and tv shows that posit the existence of a fictional group of militant Christian cultists who perpetrate a conspiracy to establish a world-wide theocracy. So why is this movie any different?\\
3) Just because the idea of a bunch of poor Indians welcoming a white man as their savior sticks in your craw doesn't mean it wouldn't happen. I've been to countries in Africa that were devastated by colonialism and received similar welcomes. Hell, as you yourself point out the movie is set at the ''pinnacle'' of British rule in India. If the villagers had any contact with the British at all they would know it's not a good idea to piss them off by assaulting any white person that shows up on their doorstep. Not to mention the fact that, as someone pointed out above, a divine prophecy ''told them'' that Indiana Jones would fall from the sky and save their village.\\
4) You say the film presents itself as "historically researched". Maybe I was watching a different film, but I don't remember that claim being made anywhere. In fact, I don't remember ANY of the films being touted as "historically researched". I think you're letting the history geek in you overcome your common sense.\\
5) The fact that the Indian government wouldn't let them shoot in one of their historical landmarks doesn't necessarily mean anything. It's just as likely they were being a bit oversensitive and saw racist imagery that wasn't really there. And your crack about "everybody from Southeast Asia looks alike" is total bunk. If that's an example of "racism" then where is your condemnation of Die Hard for using English actor Alan Rickman to play a German character Hans Gruber? Where is your complaint against the Austin Powers movies or the 2009 Sherlock Holmes film for using North American actors to play British characters? For that matter, just think about how many white Canadian actors have played white American characters in the movies and on tv. I don't see you condemning that. I guess all us white guys just look alike to you.
** Why is it that every time someone complains of white people being racist, some white guy has to pop in and make it all about them. I wonder. And to the person who edited this out before who apparently can't read, the guy said he was white in the last sentence. Also I find it interesting that white guys defending racism are apparently considered "constructive" based on the note I got to my edit, whereas people calling out racism apologists are not.
*** Apologies for missing that last sentence. That said, I don't see how just adding a dismissive note about it just being "some white guy"'s opinion is constructive--you're not arguing any of his points, you're just adding a cheap shot, saying, "Oh, you're white, so we can dismiss what you're saying as 'defending racism'." Your previous edit was blatant flaming, calling him "really, really dumb," and this one is not much better.\\\
You want to be constructive? Discuss the points. Don't just try to dismiss his points with, "Well, he's white."
*** For what it's worth, this white person agrees entirely. It stems from a lack of understanding of something called "white privilege," a blindness to the benefits whiteness bestows on a person. The fact is, racism against white people, while real, is simply not the same as racism directly by white people against other races, because of the workings of power behind it.
**** That's not a fact; that's an opinion. Workings of power depend upon the situation.
**** Let us speak, then, of the macro and the micro. On the micro level, it's perfectly possible that a nonwhite person might have the opportunity to be racist against a white person and have the power to make its consequences stick and have lasting meaning (violence, failure to advance in a job, denial of a country club membership, or whatever). But on the macro level? The vast majority of the world is full of nonwhite people who lack access to the corridors of power, disenfranchised by a global system that is the consequence of the colonial process that was founded on racist premises to begin with. It is the difference between isolated incidents and systemic inequalities. Again, white privilege. Look it up.
** ''TempleOfDoom'' was not the first movie that used the Thugees as villains. ''GungaDin'' a very popular adventure movie based on Rudyard Kipling's poem starring Cary Grant did as well and this movie was one of the influences on TOD. This troper sees the first movie ''Raiders'' as a post-modern adventure film set in the 1930s era but not one that could have been made then. For one thing a movie made in 1936(the year the Olympics were held in Berlin) wouldn't have Nazis as the villains. There's also more of an ironic sensibility to the humor of ''Raiders''. ''Temple Of Doom'' actually feels like a movie that could have been made in that less enlightened era. Albeit a lot more scarier and violent but with all the political incorrectness, sexism, and casual racism of that time. Look at any Hollywood movie in that era and the way non-whites and women in action movies were depicted. The comedy is a lot more goofier like a screwball comedy of the 30s. Whether that excuses what may be racism is subjective.

**** Let us speak, then, of the macro and the micro. On the micro level, it's perfectly possible that a nonwhite person might have the opportunity to be racist against a white person and have the power to make its consequences stick and have lasting meaning (violence, failure to advance in a job, denial of a country club membership). But on the macro level? The vast majority of the world is full of nonwhite people who lack access to the corridors of power, disenfranchised by a global system that is the consequence of the colonial process that was founded on racist premises to begin with. Again, white privilege. Look it up.

* Why did Willie get on the plane with Indy and Short Round?

** ''TempleOfDoom'' was not the first movie that used the Thugees as villains. ''GungaDin'' a very popular adventure movie based on Rudyard Kipling's poem starring Cary Grant did as well and this movie was one of the influences on TOD. This troper sees the first movie ''Raiders'' as a post-modern adventure film set in the 1930s era but not one that could have been made then. For one thing a movie made in 1936(the year the Olympics were held in Berlin) wouldn't have Nazis as the villains. There's also more of an ironic sensibility to the humor of ''Raiders''. ''Temple Of Doom'' actually feels like a movie that could have been made in that less enlightened era. Albeit a lot more scarier and violent but with all the political incorrectness, sexism, and casual racism of that time. Look at any Hollywood movie in that era and the way non-whites and women in action movies were depicted. The comedy is a lot more goofier like a screwball comedy of the 30s.
** So your point is the racism was less offensive because it was intentional? Because nope. And if people can actually not delete things just because they disagree with them, that would be great.

** So your point is the racism was less offensive because it was intentional? Because nope.

*** Short Round's white?!!!

** ''TempleOfDoom'' was not the first movie that used the Thugees as villains. ''GungaDin'' a very popular adventure movie based on Rudyard Kipling's poem starring Cary Grant did as well and this movie was one of the influences on TOD. This troper sees the first movie ''Raiders'' as a post-modern adventure film set in the 1930s era but not one that could have been made then. For one thing a movie made in 1936(the year the Olympics were held in Berlin) wouldn't have Nazis as the villains. There's also more an ironic sensibility to the humor of ''Raiders''. ''Temple Of Doom'' actually feels like a movie that could have been made in that less enlightened era. Albeit a lot more scarier and violent but with all the political incorrectness, sexism, and casual racism of that time. Look at any Hollywood movie in that era and the way non-whites and women in action movies were depicted. The comedy is a lot more goofier like a screwball comedy of the 30s.

** ''TempleOfDoom'' was not the first movie that used the Thugees as villains. ''GungaDin'' a very popular adventure movie based on Rudyard Kipling's poem starring Cary Grant did as well and this movie was one of the influences on TOD. This troper sees the first movie ''Raiders'' as a post-modern adventure film set in the 1930s era but not one that could have been made then. For one thing a movie made in 1936(the year the Olympics were held in Berlin) wouldn't have Nazis as the villains. There's also more an ironic sensibility to the humor of ''Raiders''. ''Temple Of Doom'' actually feels like a movie that could have been made in that less enlightened era. Albeit a lot more scarier and violent but with all the political incorrectness, sexism, and casual racism of that time. Look at any Hollywood movie in that era and the way non-whites and women in action movies were depicted. The comedy is a lot more goofier and more like a screwball comedy of the 30s.

** ''TempleOfDoom'' was not the first movie that used the Thugees as villains. ''GungaDin'' a very popular adventure movie based on Rudyard Kipling's poem starring Carrie Grant did as well and this movie was one of the influences on TOD. This troper sees the first movie ''Raiders'' as a post-modern adventure film set in the 1930s era but not one that could have been made then. For one thing a movie made in 1936(the year the Olympics were held in Berlin) wouldn't have Nazis as the villains. There's also more an ironic sensibility to the humor of ''Raiders''. ''Temple Of Doom'' actually feels like a movie that could have been made in that less enlightened era. Albeit a lot more scarier and violent but with all the political incorrectness, sexism, and casual racism of that time. Look at any Hollywood movie in that era and the way non-whites and women in action movies were depicted. The comedy is a lot more goofier and more like a screwball comedy of the 30s.

** ''TempleOfDoom'' was not the first movie that used the Thugees as villains. ''GungaDin'' a very popular adventure movie based on Rudyard Kipling's poem starring Carrie Grant did as well and this movie was one of the influences on TOD. This troper sees the first movie ''Raiders'' as a post-modern adventure film set in the 1930s era but not one that could have been made then. For one thing a movie made in 1936(the year the Olympics were held in Berlin) wouldn't have Nazis as the villains. There's also more an ironic sensibility to the humor of ''Raiders''. ''Temple Of Doom'' actually feels like a movie that could have been made in that less enlightened era. Albeit a lot more scarier and violent but with all it's political correctness, sexism, and casual racism of that time. Look at any Hollywood movie in that era and the way non-whites and women in most action movies were depicted. The comedy is a lot more goofier and more like a screwball comedy of the 30s.

** ''TempleOfDoom'' was not the first movie that used the Thugs as villains. ''GungaDin'' a very popular adventure movie based on Rudyard Kipling's poem starring Carrie Grant did as well and this movie was one of the influences on TOD. This troper always sees the ''Raiders'' as a post-modern adventure film set in the 1930s era but not one that could have been made then. For one thing a movie set in 1936(the year the Olympics were held in Berlin) wouldn't have Nazis as the villains. ''Temple Of Doom'' is actually feels like a movie made in that era. Albeit a lot more scarier and violent but with all it's political correctness, sexism, casual racism of that time. Look at any Hollywood movie in that era and the way non-whites and women in most action movies were depicted.