Written for the Indiana Jones Blogathon at Cerebral Mastication.
When it comes to enduring popularity, most of the films I’ve written about so far for Yesterday’s Hits have fallen by the wayside. They had their moments of glory, but now they’ve been cast aside in favor of films that have either aged better or simply had the good luck not to wear out their welcome too soon. By contrast, this week’s entry is a movie I’m guessing almost everyone here has seen, and which I’d venture to guess most of you own on DVD. Yet Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom often seems to be treated as the odd man out in the Indiana Jones franchise. In conjunction with this week’s release of Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, I’ve tried to figure out why exactly this is the case.
What made Temple of Doom a hit?: Talk about a silly question. Raiders of the Lost Ark was the biggest hit of 1981, a hugely popular adventure that turned a whip-cracking archeologist into one of the truly iconic Hollywood characters. Raiders was a rarity, a movie with almost universal appeal, with plenty of action, a hint of romance, evil Nazi villains, far-flung locations, and a hero audiences would follow to the ends of the Earth. So it was inevitable that director Steven Spielberg, producer 
George Lucas, and star Harrison Ford would bring the character back to the big screen, and nearly as inevitable that the film would scare up a lot of business. And that it did, becoming the #2 hit of 1984, trailing only Ghostbusters.
What happened?: One of the cardinal rules of sequels is that it’s difficult to live up to the original, doubly so when the original film is as great and beloved as Raiders of the Lost Ark. Sure, it happens on occasion, but how often? So despite Temple’s box office, it was almost a foregone conclusion that it couldn’t match the popularity of its predecessor. Audiences still loved Dr. Jones all right, with two more sequels still to come, but most viewers today see Temple merely as a fun, well-crafted thrill ride, rather than the classic Raiders is.
Does Temple of Doom still work?: All in all, the critical rep for the film isn’t far off. Spielberg’s skill at generating excitement is as keen here as ever, but overall the film lacks the charm of Raiders. Part of the blame rests on the shoulders of Ford, who doesn’t appear to expend much effort in his performance. Especially in his early scenes, Ford seems to be acting while hung over, so bland and flat does he appear onscreen. Eventually he comes alive, around the time the action starts, but Temple was the first sign of the sluggishness that would begin to creep into his performances more and more over the next two decades.
Perhaps the most frequent criticism of the film is Kate Capshaw’s performance as Willie, and I’ve got to say I’m in full agreement with the naysayers. Granted, Capshaw isn’t entirely to blame- Willie is an extremely thin character, her distinguishing characteristics being that she’s (a) Indy’s designated love interest, and (b) not Marion. But Capshaw herself doesn’t help matters. Most of her performance consists of shrieking, whining, and bitching at Indy, but Capshaw is too prosaic onscreen to make any of it work. She’s got no style, and not much charisma. And when an actress can’t even manage to deliver the line “are you crazy?” and make it sound convincing, there’s something wrong.
But while many people are prone to criticizing Indy’s pal Short Round (Ke Huy Quan), I have to admit I’ve always liked the little guy. Whereas Willie’s presence seems to be dictated by the film’s need to have some kind of female lead, the real love story in the film is the mentor/sidekick relationship between Indy and Shorty. Look at the way Spielberg frames these two together- time and again we see Short Round patterning his behavior after his idol, and it’s he, not Willie, who ends up having to save Dr. Jones when all seems lost. True, he’s given a little too much cutesy dialogue (“hold on to your potatoes!”), but the love he has for Indy is genuinely moving in spots, and he actually gets some fighting of his own to do, while Willie stands on the sidelines and punches at the air.
When I was younger, I always found it odd that Indiana Jones would take time to hunt for a bunch of stones after he’d already discover the Ark of the Covenant. But while the MacGuffin of Temple of Doom lacks the built in mystique of Raiders’ object of desire, the relatively small-scaled quest ultimately suits the film’s storyline. The Ark is an archeological milestone, so naturally the man who found it would want to go down in history. By contrast, Temple finds its hero setting out for “fortune and glory” only to discover a more important cause to fight for in the end. Faced with personal gain, he instead decides to do the right thing to save others. It’s an old story, but done right it still works, and Spielberg and company make it work.
And of course, it’s still exciting as hell. For all the awkwardness present in the 80 minutes of the story, the last 40 minutes more than compensate. But what really puts 
these scenes over is how brutal they are at times. Temple of Doom is often remembered as the film that helped bring about the PG-13 rating, and even today it’s surprising how hard-hitting and violent the film is in spots. I don’t think this is an accident. Spielberg, coming off blockbusters like Raiders and E.T., was becoming ill at ease with being Hollywood’s resident family entertainer, and his darker impulses come through loud and clear in Temple of Doom. For every funny animal trick we see, there’s a genuinely scary or disturbing bit that makes its mark (Mola Ram scared me way more than Toht when I was little). And while this mishmash of tones doesn’t always work, it’s nonetheless fascinating to see. As a stepping stone in Spielberg’s attempts to grow from the blockbuster king into the cinematic Elder Statesman we know him as today, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom is an key work, something one couldn’t have known way back in 1984.