Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom

(656 votes, average 4.25 out of 5)
Facebook Share
Comments (618)
  • DracoDeVis
    avatar
    Yes! I've been saying for years that this movie was incredibly stupid.
  • Whisky Tango Foxtrot
    avatar
    Star Crash is stupid but fun. Temple of Doom is just stupid. The whole thing is just painful to sit through. Definitely the worst of the Indiana Jones movies.
  • SeanKelleher98  - What
    avatar
    Have you seen Kingdom of The Crystal Skull?
  • Formula Fox
    I've seen Crystal Skull. IMO, it's better than Temple of Doom.
  • Dogmatix
    avatar
    I totally agree, IMO there are even Uwe Boll movies, that are better than Temple of Doom... Ok that's a big lie, but really I don't like Temple of Doom :) .
  • Sales_Kital
    That was a good movie, it had a good story, and even the way they had the aliens be involved was good.

    I never understood why people say it's bad. Only possible reason I have herd was "they put aliens in it" to which my response is, "so? The put aliens in worse things."
  • sc00t3r32
    avatar
    Not only that, but its switch of villain really rubs me the wrong way.

    Also, it was really unnecessary and just couldn't give us the magic that made the originals so great.
  • StrayZer0  - Yes
    It's a good movie, Indiana Jones have NEVER been realistic, none of them, get over it.
  • Amykins
    avatar
    At least Crystal Skull didn't have Willie. On that merit alone it's better!
  • dennett316
    avatar
    Damn right it was fun. There is nothing in Temple of Doom that is worse than greaser monkeys, CGI prairie dogs, or nuking the fridge. Willie almost makes it, don't get me wrong she is annoying, but there is far more stupid in Crystal Skull.

    The raft scene is implausible as hell, but you can see a certain logic in how they survive...the raft opens up which slows their descent and is an inflatable landing pad to cushion the fall onto snow, which also cushions the fall. Going over into the water is a slight twist on the "raft going over the falls" idea and again, the raft is large enough that it slows their descent.

    In real life it doesn't work, but in movie logic it makes a strange kind of sense.
    The fridge thing makes no sense in either the real or movie world. Concussive blasts from normal explosions knock people off their feet, the explosion from a nuke would kill you with its power from that alone, inside a fridge or not. And the fact that the fridge is thrown so far would ensure his death also. And how does the door of the fridge stay closed? And wouldn't the heat from the blast cook him?

    There is far less to question with the raft than the fridge, the stunt work is better, the characters are more memorable, the imagery is awesome, the dark tone really gives a sense of threat and, with the exception of the screening when they're on the raft going down the mountain, the film looks better than Crystal Skull with its sub-par CGI effects having ZERO charm.

    Temple of Doom is the worst of the original trilogy, but it's leagues ahead of Crystal Skull.
  • Crunchy_Frog
    Dear Nostalgia Critic,

    you complained why did the villains take the children as slave labor instead of the adults of the village?

    Because
    1) the adults are needed to work the fields, whereas if you took all the adults the children would starve,
    2) for centuries, until child labour was abolished, children of poor families were used as mine workers, because they are strong in relation to their size, eat less, fit into small tunnels, can be easily intimidated by adults, and can't fight back or demand wages, thank you.

    Aa for for silliness... Indiana Jones movies are Pulp Adventure movies. Things are allowed to be over the top, as long as they are entertaining. The flaw of Kingdom of the Crystal Skull however, is it somehow managed to be godawful boring.

    As Dennet316 said: The inflatable raft acts like a parachute and as a cushion. They fall first onto a snowy slope, then into water. A fridge, however, is not padded inside, and hurling it through the air like a cannon ball and smashing it into the ground would smash the bones of anyone inside.

    From Mythbusters:
    http:// mythbustersresults.com/ episode37
    Q: It is possible to jump from a disabled airplane and use an inflatable life raft to safely return to earth (as in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom)
    Result: busted
    A: Any attempt to use the raft failed due to the instability of the raft in freefall. It was possible to rig the raft as a parachute and land with minimal injuries, but this would not be possible to perform while jumping from a disabled aircraft.

    However, given that both in Action movies and Pulp Action/Pulp Adventure movies (e.g. The A-Team, Die Hard, 1970s Batman, Flash Gordon, Indiana Jones, etc.), our hero protagonists tend to be incredibly lucky, incredibly skilled, able to jury-rig anything if the plot needs it, and can do crazy stunts or survive an explosion to the face with minimal lacerations due to being awesome, of course Indiana Jones can use an inflatable raft like a parachute. ;-)

    That's why, to be frank, the fridge scene in IJtKoCS did not bother me that much, neither did the aliens, but the pointless CGI monkeys scene with Shia LaBeouf however did.

    But goddammit, Screeching Willy *is* annoying.
  • DuckTales
    I would really like to see mythbusters throw a dummy inside a 1950s fridge and detonate enough explosives near to it to hit it with a 5psi shockwave, which is the threshold for causing the complete destruction of an ordinary house.

    I actually think its fairly likely the fridge would actually provide good enough protection to allow the dummy to escape relatively unscathed.

    What many people don't seem to get is that steel is very strong and would withstand an explosion much better than a wooden structure.

    The movie is a bit silly in that it only shows the fridge being thrown from the blast, they should have should a whole lot of other debris as well.

    To me, it seems totally plausible that a person could survive that way. Sure the lack of other debris, and the fridge being bounced around like that afterwards was silly, but the nuked firdge thing really doesn't deserve the "that's totally stupid" consensus.

    The US did do a lot of tests on how structures were effected by nuclear blasts. That's how we know the 5psi shockwave threshold. If they went throught the trouble of building a mock town to test the effects of a nuclear blast, it is likely that at that point they are already somewhat aware of that 5psi threshold. So the nuclear test depicted in the movie is likely at the right yeild in distance to generate a shockwave that would be right at the threshold where the buildings were constructed. Meaning just enough of shckwave to knock the buildings down, but not enough to cause significant damage to a fridge.

    The more I think about it, the more plausible it seems.
  • Chipmunk Man
    What you forget: A nuclear blast produces heat equivalent to that of the Sun. Even if he somehow survived the physical shockwaves he would be incinerated instantly.
  • Aerrow
    The fridge wasn't used so much as protection from the blast as it was for protection from the radiation. also, the blast was coming from quite a bit of distance away, probably about a mile or more. so the fridge is actually a better bet than just standing there
  • Stochatic
    As it so happens many times with mythbusters, "instability" screams to me that there is still a 1 in infinite chance...and that's Hollywood. But when it comes to the fridge, the force of being thrown in that thing to a 70 year old in, lets face it, not the best shape, should at least destroy some bones.
  • Malidictus
    Isn't Indie technically immortal in the Kingdom of the Christal Skull? Unless the Holy Grain turns out to have expired.

    I see nothing wrong with Kingdom of the Crystal Skull that isn't wrong with the Temple of Doom, aside from the trite old argument that "practical effects are better than CGI," which I don't buy.
  • Steve the Pocket
    avatar
    The Holy Grail's effects are indeed sadly temporary. ("Meemeer meememeemeer.") The knight Templar died at the end of the film, and in "Crystal Skull" Indy talked about his dad — who also drank from the Grail — being dead. I have heard the theory that it kept him fit and tough, and given how well he was handling those other action scenes, who's to say?
  • Forlong
    avatar
    We prefer to think the people who made that movie were just stupid.
  • OldAndNew
    avatar
    yep, immediate even. my favorite theory for why the knight was so old, despite presumably drinking from the Grail on a regular basis, is that once in a while the knight would despair(as humans do) and stop drinking. seven hundred years worth of bad days could easily add up to fifty years or so.
  • DuckTales
    No the condition of the grail immortality thing was that they couldn't leave that place (something something don't cross the seal). Basically the grail only grants immortality to the people that protect it. So the knight was immortal because he never the place, he just stayed there and guarded it for hundreds of years. But his brothers left, so they grew old and died. Remember the tomb with all the rats? That was one of the knight's brothers.

    Since Indy left the grail place, he is not immortal.
  • DuckTales
    I'd say its more likely to survive the fridge thing than the raft thing.

    The door of the fridge would stay closed because fridges from that era latched shut. Of course that makes it odd that Indy got out of the fridge afterwards, there isn't a way to open those fridges from the inside. Children playing in old fridges suffocated for this reason.

    There is no way the raft would fall like that. It would flip all around every which way, dumping out all of its passengers.

    The fridge thing really depends on the yield of the nuclear blast and how far from the blast he was. We sort of get an indication of how far away the blast was (probably a few miles away), but no real indication of the yield.

    People bitch about the fridge thing, because we sort of have this awe over nuclear weapons. We seem to think that everything within a hundred miles is instantly vaporised. That isn't really the case. Again it all depends on the yeild of the weapon. Contrary to popular belief, no one in Hiroshima was vaporised by the nuclear explosion. They were killed by a firestorm that was caused by the detonation. The "Atomic Dome" in Hiroshima is within a few blocks of ground zero. That building is still standing.

    So despite all the jokes people make about the fridge nuking, if you were inside a 1950's fridge when a low yield nuclear blast went off, you would likely survive. You would be protected from the fire, and any debris blasted towards you. The real danger would be suffocating because you couldn't get out of the fridge afterwards.
  • HazeRorrim
    avatar
    That makes sense I'd beilive that the fridge wouldnt be blown apart or melted if it was hit by the shockwave of the nuke,but what I wonder is why he came out as well as he did.I'd think that he'd have a few broken bones after being tossed around a steel fridge that he could barly fit in,or id also think that he'd be baked to(the fridge was pretty much cooked,I also rewatched the whole scene so i dont thnik im missing anything)but again their are alot of other scenes in indiana jones that you could call BS on.On another note people do take things to seriously and I dont think that these over the top scenes should be taken realisticaly theyre just over the top fun,which if people do over think and over critizes it wont be much fun for them.
  • loneytunes  - Dude
    Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is a fun movie. I love it. Not as much as Raiders or Last Crusade, but way more than Temple of Doom.

    First, I actually like Shia Labeouf, I think he's funny. Second I liked the way it harkened back to 50s pulp. Third nuking the fridge is a hilarious jab at the idea back in the 50's that you could take "precautions" to save your life during a hydrogen bomb explosion, i.e. duck and cover, under the desk kids, build a shelter, etc. I found it just making fun of that and when he rolled out I laughed and said "that was awesome". Never had a problem with it.

    Lastly, while I'll give you the stupid unnecessary prairie dogs that are pointless, the rest of the movie is fast paced and entertaining. It didn't make me think, I had fun and I got to see another Indiana Jones movie. I will be paying to see a fifth if it ever happens, and I hope it does.
  • Iwanttoleaveacomment
    You do know that a man lived for like 2 minuets without a heart in this movie right?
  • HanSK
    avatar
    YES!
    Now please do the same for the Star Wars movies!

    I swear, the original trilogy is just SO retarder compared to Episode 2 and 3
  • scottjc  - WHAT?
    Nobody can be this stupid, Obvious troll is obvious.
  • HanSK
    avatar
    More like the only sane person in the room

    seriously, there's a very good reason why critics called the original trilogy garbage when it first came out
  • Axel Osbourne
    avatar
    He can't review it, because LUPA DID IT FIRST EEESSSOOLLEEEE!
  • Necroscourge
    Lupa did The Room first and he reviewed it. Your idiot logic has been defeated!
  • Axel Osbourne  - Reply to Nercoscourge
    avatar
    I think you mean my idiot joke and referrance to Lupa's Robovampire review, right?
  • SciFiGi  - YES
    avatar
    I hate this movie. The acting is stupid and the writing is so inaccurate/offensive that I am surprised India didn't try to have Lucas assassinated.
  • Iwanttoleaveacomment
    Watch redlettermedia's review of those awesome new Star Wars it's better than the movies themselves.
  • ultramanmattia
    avatar
    I never understood the hate for the fridge.

    Even in previous films Indiana Jones did something phisically impossible.
  • PontyMython
    avatar
    I know, right? in raiders he gets to the enemy island by holding on to an enemy submarine, somehow avoiding either drowning or having his skin pulled off by the friction with water. yet no-one ever mentions that
  • Jegsimmons
    avatar
    or finding and surviving the arc of the covenant, the whole holy grail thing, REMOVING weight setting off a trap and giant boulder, or in the last crusades opening WHERE HE TELEPORTED IN A MAGIC BOX!

    personally, i have never seen an Indy film i didnt enjoy, even crystal skull surprised me. it looked creative, it was an interesting concept, shia lebouf actually pulled in a good performance (personally i think he's a good actor as long as the director is incompetent (michael bay)) Ford has good a good performance, the villians make alot of sense, the 50s setting is pretty cool, ect.
    and there's alot i like about temple of doom also.

    Personally i think people just like giving george Lucas shit because he's an easy target. Hell every time i watch phantom menace i keep wonder why people hate it THAT MUCH. now dont get me wrong, episode 1 is weak for a star wars film, but hell it was fun.
  • YoUnRcker_MoM
    avatar
    I never saw Crystal Skull but I agree the Temple of Doom is more memorable for me than the other Indy films.
  • Karri
    A LATE WW2 submarine would be lucky to push 9 knots submerged, and cruising speed was more along the lines of 2 knots. That's around 10.3 and 3.3 MPH respectively. Certainly not enough to pull off his skin.
    Holding onto the submarine/drowning? Probably not that realistic. Still not the equivalent of surviving atomic freaking blast by hiding in a fridge.

    I always found Indiana Jones unrealistic, but usually in a magically-themed pulp manner. The whole nuke thing went beyond that and became cartoonish.
  • gehringer
    Yeah, but u-boats had extremely limited range when underwater, so they spent most of their time on the surface and only dived when attacked or doing a daytime torpedo run. The sub Indy was hanging on to was doing neither, so it wouldn't have dived.

    The nuke-fridge thing is still bullshit though.
  • ladydiskette
    avatar
    Just the look on the Critic's face during the "Kali-Ma/Sacrifical" scene should have give him a indictation that there was a reason the movie single-handedly created the PG-13 rating. Which Speilburg has mentioned he had no qualms with, which I don't blame him, I would feel pretty honored too if one of my films made movie rating history.


    Also 5 stars for use of the Team Snob. :D
  • KittyKatAllen
    avatar
    Actualy Indy got into the submarine... so he wouldnt have drowned... more likely to gotten captured by the bad guys then drown ^_^
  • loneytunes
    No. He didn't. The movie never shows him IN the sub and he doesn't take a Nazi uniform until after it arrives. Doesn't it make sense when stowing away to immediately do that in case someone sees you?
  • agrippa911
    avatar
    Actually the submarine bit wasn't technically wrong. Subs normally traveled on the surface only diving when attacking a ship (or being attacked). On the surface they could use their diesel engine for faster speed compared to submerged using an electric motor running off of batteries at half the surfaced speed.

    Now normally on the surface they'd have several crew scanning the horizon for enemy ships or aircraft but since it's technically pre-war there wouldn't be a need for that.

    So it's actually quite possible.
  • TheIrrehensibleTJ
    avatar
    Yeah, the first time after seeing the movie that I heard someone complaining about the fridge thing, I honestly thought they were kidding.
    He's a movie serial hero, of course he survives the impossible. It's set in the 50's, of course they thought a lead-lined fridge would save you from a nuke. Hell, all he really needed to do was duck and cover.
  • Haon
    avatar
    I know this is low, to respond to a comment just to get near the top, but I have to say this. "Magic carpenter who came back as a zombie"? Aren't afraid you're gonna get a little bit of flack for that?
  • Axel Osbourne
    avatar
    Flack? This is the man that invented SantaChrist we're talking about!
  • Haon
    avatar
    Oh, yeah.
  • HankMan
    It may not be as forgettable as Crystal Skull but by god I wish it was!
  • xen999
    avatar
    Yeah, I'm sorry but I gotta side with 80s Dan & crew, Temple of Doom is awesome! It's gloriously good campiness only the 80s could get right!

    If you really think Crystal Skull is better than Doom you seriously gotta rethink your life... Not one bit of that movie is redeemable.
  • gamer46ful
    avatar
    I know same here I didn't like this movie either because the characters are stupid annoying and the jokes are so dumb. I don't like it when people flip shit on the 4th movie when this movie is just as dumb as that one
  • Kamdan
    Why does this film get a free pass? Because, it’s not a carbon copy of Raiders of the Lost Ark like the last two were.

    I gotta admit that the tap dancers were a little too much. Reminds me too much of 1941. Good call on the Blazing Saddles reference!

    Indy had a good point in leaving Marion where she was and he kind of was out numbered anyways against the Nazis. Elsa dying wasn’t his fault. She kept reaching for the Holy Grail and her glove slipped.

    Willie Scott doesn’t bother me. Her character is supposed to be someone that is not comfortable in this type of setting and don’t pretend that you wouldn’t whine and act like little bitch if you found yourself in this unwilling situation.

    Short Round gets a pass from me, because at least Indy gets to slap the shit out of him. We didn’t get to see that happen to Jar Jar Binks. Thank you for proving your own point with yourself.

    Why is it just because Short Round has an accent, it’s a stereotype? Did you want him to have a British accent instead?

    British accented Dan Ackyrod is a waste, just like you as Melvin, Brother of the Joker. It doesn’t mean that he’s terrible.

    The original idea of the plane getting shot down by Lao Che’s men would have been better than the pilots just jumping out of the plane, but then we wouldn’t have gotten the “NICE TRY, LAO CHE!” line.

    Stop bitching about the raft! At least it’s not CGI. It looks believable to me, because it’s a practical effect.

    Again, don’t pretend that you wouldn’t freak out if you saw all of those damn animals everywhere you turned, but the Pee-wee bit got me!

    You do know that Maharajá means King, right? So, he’s obviously a boy. Remember the quote from Short Round, “Maybe he likes older women?” PAY ATTENTION!

    The Indians eating all of the unusual food is because they’re under the influence of Kali.

    HAHA, the “checking on Willie” music is from Batman. I can’t wait to see the YouTube videos of the music saying that. Thanks.

    I don’t get the dog in place of Kali.

    I thank the sacrifice scene the whole reason why I got into the Indiana Jones films in the first place. It was so bad ass!

    Lucas attributed the tone, because of his divorce. I think it works, because it gives something Indy noble to do, when he was just planning on taking the rocks without returning them. This isn’t as depressing as The Addams Family when they made those kids cry after hearing Hansel and Gretel.

    His name is Mola Ram! It’s not that hard to forget, since it’s one of Indy’s memorable lines, “Mola Ram… prepare to meet Kali… IN HELL!” You must have made Brad and his friends do that. Try naming the villains alongside Belloq.

    They forced it down his throat, not because they were torturing the Short Round (and himself).
  • sophronia_chaos
    avatar
    That's Lindsay's dog, whose name is Kali.
  • Bloodrealm
    Ah, I didn't get that joke either, thanks. Kind of confusing for me. I was thinking "Okay, Lindsay's dog... is he censoring something, like Oancitizen does, or...? I mean it is kinda funny in a silly weirdness kind of way, but..." Makes much more sense, now. I don't think I've ever heard her dog's name mentioned before.
  • doggans
    avatar
    //Willie Scott doesn’t bother me. Her character is supposed to be someone that is not comfortable in this type of setting and don’t pretend that you wouldn’t whine and act like little bitch if you found yourself in this unwilling situation.//

    Aside from the performance (which I also find annoying), the problem with Willy is that she has no personality beyond "women are vain and like diamonds, amirite?" Contrast with Marcus Brody in Last Crusade, who is in a similar uncomfortable situation and is a bit of a doofus because of it, but he's still competent in other areas and sticks to his principles.

    //Stop bitching about the raft! At least it’s not CGI. It looks believable to me, because it’s a practical effect.//

    It doesn't matter if it LOOKS believable; we still can't believe that three human beings in a barely-inflated rubber raft would survive two giant falls in a row. And having them survive both falls with barely a scratch causes the exact same problem as nuking the fridge in Crystal Skull: it paints the characters as basically invincible, removing any sense of threat from later sequences.
  • Kamdan
    At least with Willie they acknowledged what a pain in the ass she was. Vicki Vale in Batman was worse, due to the fact that they establish her as a renowned photographer, especially in the war torn nation of Corto Maltese. With her screaming at the drop of a hat, how is that believable?

    You didn't notice that it fully inflated on the way down? That's what made it work, since it cushioned the fall. It's not like in Crystal where they keep going over the wall falls, until they all fall out for the last one.
  • jz1337
    Wow you really must be buried deep in the Nostalgia to excuse all the problems in temple of doom, but crystal skull was too far?
  • Lightice
    Short Round is an obnoxious Asian sidekick, done in the style of 1940's adventure flicks, invariably racist in their depiction. Lucas took a racist character archetype, and brought it to the modern day without any changes.

    Ditto for Willie, she pretty much exists to fulfill every offensive female stereotype from the early 20th century movies.

    And no, the raft never looked in any way believable. Funny yes, believable no.

    Kali is an actual Hindu goddess and would you know it, she is in fact not evil. To make her basically Satan is pretty damn offensive, along with the claim that her husband, Shiva, would be her divine opposition. The Thuggees did in fact exist, but they were a small, secretive organization, spread thin in the countryside. They were not an evil conspiracy behind the official government, apparently exploiting the poor villagers -- that job belonged to the British East Indian Company.

    And as for Mola Ram, they mention his name in exactly one scene, and it's never explained where Indy even heard it in the first place.

    Sorry, but the Temple of Doom was pretty stupid, and way too often also very annoying. It did have some cool scenes in it, which most people remember, and think that the movie was better than it actually was. But I also agree with the ending; I do remember the Temple of Doom, while I barely remember anything about the Crystal Skull.
  • Kamdan
    So, the only proper way to represent an Asian character is for them not to have an accent?

    They wanted an opposite character of Marion. It's unfair to assume that every girl in the world would handle this situation as strong. I know people who complain simply for it being too hot outside, so having her reactions isn't too far fetched as you make it out to be.

    The Thuggee still performed killing for Kali. You could make the same point how they portrayed the Nazis and even more so for the Communists in the last film.
  • Greenjackspeaks
    so an asian accent equals shouting obnoxiously? it's not the accent that got NC, because he's not nitpicked accents before, unless they were unbelievable, it's the poor portrayal of asian people as incapable of using an indoor voice.

    her reactions might be appropriate, but they're annoying.

    nazis were all evil, but I agree with you on the communists
  • Kooshmeister
    avatar
    Mola Ram's name was originally to be given when he and Indiana first meet. In the script, he introduces himself. Whereas in the movie he doesn't, unless part of the scene got cut.

    As for "Kali = Satan," you could make the argument that because the Thuggee are an aberrant sect, this is uniquely THEIR version of what they think Kali is. More likely though it's just the filmmakers not understanding Hindi mythology. Like how filmmakers also don't understand Greek and Roman mythology, and always made Hades/Pluto evil.

    You're right that the Thuggee weren't as large and organized as depicted in the film... but this is part of the plot. Mola Ram explains that he's making the cult larger and more more politically powerful - what with with the maharajah under his thumb and all.
  • Kamdan
    I don’t think Willie could stand good in a fight.

    Yeah, the hammer bonk, the cartoon violence and Mola Ram punching himself was pretty over the top, but that’s typical Spielberg shit.

    I’d scream my head off too Mola Ram showed up in front of me like that.

    Mola Ram threw the Thuggee so he could try and knock off Indy.

    Indy’s invested because understands the power, based off of what he saw and how he was actually under the influence, which is what he acknowledges at the end and gives the village back the stone.
  • mlsterben
    avatar
    No mention of Club Obi Wan?

    Also, lol "nucular."
  • Mikeman2000
    But this one is my favorite of the 4!
  • Joker Jr.
    avatar
    Mine as well. I guess I'm a sucker for bad movies, but that's ok, I could like worse.

    I actually like Willy in this...but I never really did like the woman.

    Add another movie on my guilty pleasure list.
  • Joker Jr.
    avatar
    ...crap I meant I like SHORTROUND than Willy!
  • Josefsen
    Just me or is the guilty pleasure thing a bit pointless? Either you like it (you think it´s a good movie) or you don´t (you think it´s bad), why does it matter what other people think? It´s not a guilty pleasure, just different taste...
  • invisiboy42293
    Yeah, but you can think something is bad on a technical level and still get pleasure out of watching it. No one would call The Room or Showgirls good movies, but that doesn't make them any less unintentionally hilarious.
  • Josefsen
    I´m pretty sure that Showgirls is exactly what it´s trying to be^^, a satire. I like the Room, because it´s fun. I don´t consider it a guilty pleasure, just seems a bit pretentious. This movie is above me, my taste is too superior to truly enjoy this movie! :p

    Besides, who decides whether a movie is a guilty pleasure or not? Temple of Doom is, as far as i know, regarded as a classic, how come it´s suddenly a "guilty pleasure"?
  • Greenjackspeaks
    a guilty pleasure is anything that you are embarrassed to enjoy, like a grown man watching a cartoon for little girls, or anyone that still watches pokemon. this embarrassment stems from society's idea of what is normal, and the fear that not being normal means something might be wrong with you, thus the guilt of doing something wrong, even though there is nothing logically wrong with it.
  • baticus_moronicus
    avatar
    Josefsen- Showgirls is trying to be both a satire and also be full of women doing sexy things and being sexily exploited. It's like a satire with its hands down its pants the whole time. I think NChick was pretty on the mark when she called it a 'woman-sploitation epic'.
  • PopCultureOtaku
    avatar
    This is my least favorite of the Indiana Jones movies including Kingdom Of Crystal skulls. Never liked it. Yes I liked nuke the fridge indy movie better. Just felt weird when you put next other two movies. Scared the crap out of me as a kid too. Ha, ha, ha. Dumb fox news joke. Worst I have heard from Critic especially since probably MSNBC joke would have worked better. Will say that fun crossover and video even though it's still worst of indy movies.
  • Famous Aqua Dragon  - ToD VS. KotCS (my oppinion)
    avatar
    I thought this movie was not as great as I thought. But everybody was like, "If it's not Crystal Skull, then it's alright". I'd rather see Crystal Skull if it means that it would be safer. My sis and I were scarred by this movie when we were children...



    But enough about me. How has your day been going?
  • Mr.Evil
    avatar
    And the winner of the award for "First commenter to be offended by Fox News being rightly ridiculed" goes to...
  • bh5496  - @ PopCultureOtaku
    Nah fox news works fine since they spew much more radical bs.
  • invisiboy42293
    Can't really argue with that since I don't really watch Fox News (or any TV news, for that matter), but I do think it's becoming a bit of an overused punchline.
  • Malvolio21
    I'm a Republican, and frankly I'm sick of being considered the "enemy" of pop culture. The only difference between you and me is that we have different OPINIONS. That's it, nothing more. I'm not racist, I'm not sexist, I'm not closed-minded, and I'm not an asshole. But just about everything in the entertainment industry seems destined to paint us as the world's villains. That's why I've always liked this site; Doug Walker himself has said that he's politically neutral, disliking the film "Easy A" for being "despicably left." But 3 out of his last 5 reviews have contained jokes about either a Republican or people who generally lean to the right. I'm beginning to think that not even this site is safe anymore. (Well, at least there's still Linkara.)

    Furthermore, I'd be willing to bet that 99% of people who make jokes about Fox News don't even watch it. They watch people like Jon Stewart make fun of it, and draw from that. Does Fox News exaggerate the Democrats' viewpoints, making them sound worse than they are? I admit, it does on occasion. But you know what-- that's exactly what mainstream media has been doing to us. So apparently, people can dish it out, but they can't take it.
  • Mr.Evil
    avatar
    On occasion?

    Fox News isn't even subtle anymore about what it's become. Own up to that, and maybe I can take your opinion seriously.
  • Storm Kensho
    avatar
    You essentially encapsulated what I was going to say...

    Good work.
  • pinky75910
    avatar
    Why do you hold other news stations to Fox News standards that they themselves don't adhere to? THAT's fair and balanced. If you don't want to be the victim and be attacked, don't go around attacking others. If you want to be fair and balanced, BE FAIR AND BALANCED. If you want to be a News show, be a news show, not "Fox Opinions"
  • Malvolio21
    "If you don't want to be the victim and be attacked, don't go around attacking others."

    But isn't that the reason people attack Fox News, and conservatives in general? Because they feel attacked by the things they say? This is what I'm talking about-- it's apparently okay for liberals to stand up for their beliefs and put down anyone who opposes them, but God forbid a conservative should ever do that.

    I will grant that a news station probably isn't the appropriate forum for conservatives to have their say, and that "Fair and Balanced" is an inaccurate motto. But can you honestly say that conservative viewpoints would be welcomed anywhere else without being insulted and ridiculed?
  • DuckTales
    Relax dude. No one is picking on you for your political beliefs. They are picking on Fox News for being a crappy news channel. CNN is crap, MSNBC is crap, they are all crap really.

    The problem is that having a bunch of talking heads shouting their opinions at each other is a lot cheaper than actually investigating and reporting real news. They need programming to fill up their 24-hour schedule, so they all do the same thing.

    Fox News gets picked on a lot more because they takes things to extremes. When I first saw Glen Beck I couldn't believe that it wasn't supposed to be some kind of satire. Having guys like that around gets them attention, so when someone says "bad 24-hour news channel" most people think of Fox News.
  • Gregdawg  - Yup
    avatar
    I agree, Fox News jokes have been old for at least 2 years now. The fact is that all news networks are biased, the only difference is that Fox is biased to the right (they should drop Fair and Balanced imo). Not to mention Doug made a Glen Beck joke, and Beck left Fox News over a year ago. It came across as lazy compared to Doug's usual comedy. He's better off just staying neutral if he wants to please both sides.
  • Greenjackspeaks  - response to malvolio
    every time I watch fox news (their national and global divisions. this doesn't occur as much with my local station thank god) they're attacking something I agree with. if I say I don't like them because they're going about expressing their opinions on what is supposed to be a news channel, and therefore unbiased, I get flack from the ultraconservatives.

    I don't have any issues with normal republicans, just the crazy ones. hell, I'm rather neutral politically, but I feel the republican party doesn't compromise or listen to ideas from the other side. the more republicans I've seen in one place, the more likely I've been to get killed by a lynch mob. even when I disagree with democrats I don't feel that endangered.
  • minnie3434
    avatar
    lol loved the opening and the cameos. 80's critics rule! And the reason they had him survive a nuclear blast inside fridge is, because they use to claim that they could survive in one if it was lead-lined. It suppose to be able to reduce the radiation rays and all that stuff back in the day. Doesn't mean it's not stupid as hell.
  • SpeedyEric
    avatar
    That's also the answer to that argument, Minnie. My mother and I also noticed that when we both saw it in the theatre when it first came out. Also, these movies are based on the old movie serials; they are suppose to have stuff like that.
  • Moreno X  - To SpeedyEric
    Exactly! I notice how campy and silly the films were even I didn't knew they were inspired by the classic B adventure films from 30s, 40s, etc. There's people out there seem to not get the whole picture sadly.
  • BooRat
    avatar
    Doug, you betrayed Shiva!
    I like Temple of Doom it's not my favorite of all the Indiana Jones movies(that'd be Last Crusade) but I still enjoy it a lot more than Chrystal Skull!
    I'm shocked and surprised no use of the South Park, "They're raping him" skits!
    I've never had Indian food but the most common thing I hear about it is it's spicy and smells. But that's never stopped me from trying something before!
    So does this count as an 80s Dan episode or just a crossover/cameo?
    I figured from what little explanation that was given the Evil Skull Head cult leader guy was suppose to be the same guy from the story Indy told in that scene we're detracted by Willy screaming at everything... Like he kept one of the stones and it gave him a form of immortality! Also, for why he threw his own man off the bridge was he was trying to use him to knock Indy off.
    My only real kind of disappointment in this film is the villains never got to their end goal for Indy to make it backfire on them because he knew more about what was going on than them. Like the other films where the Nazis opened the Ark and it melted them but Indy knew not to look, or in Last Crusade when he knew that Jesus's cup would be made of wood, or hell even in Chrystal Skull the Russian woman got to talk to the "alien" and get her knowledge, but for some strange reason it killed her... it didn't make a lick of sense but she still reached her end goal and died for it!
  • Gigakoops
    avatar
    Great review! But I do enjoy this film for it's camp and feel. It's not my favorite (that would be Raiders), but it's still good for me.

    But this review is hilarious. And I liked the 80's Dan cameo.
  • Kaytori
    I actually like KotCS more then Temple of Doom. And you raised some great points NC
  • Moreno X  - To Kaytori
    Its great to see the minority slowly and growing to accept and enjoy Crystal Skull despite how it wasnt strong like the first three were. I like Crystal Skull too, but I also enjoy Temple of Doom.

    *sadpanda face*
  • zeo1fan  - YESSSSS!!!!!!!!
    avatar
    I HATED THIS PREQUEL!!!! Thanks for covering it, Critic!!!! I thought I was the only one. XD
  • GLKnight
    avatar
    Okay, gotta point this out.

    1) Indy's an Anthropologist. I know people are going to argue that he's an Archaeologist, but look up "Field Anthropologist". That's Indiana Jones. It was going to be my field of study in college, but I couldn't finish (for reasons I will not discuss).

    2) In the Thugee sect, human sacrifice was actually a natural part of the ceremonies. Also, they were well known for abducting children and indoctrinating them into their cult.

    3) Those dishes at the banquet are (for the most part) REAL dishes. Just not that... recognized.

    4) The film takes place in the 1930's, before Germany started taking actions on the rest of Europe. At that time in China, there was a great push towards Westernization in most coastal areas, specifically Hong Kong, Shanghai, Beijing/Peking, and other areas of Canton.
  • MasterofHorses93  - Really, Critic? Really?
    avatar
    I agree 100% with Brad Jones on this, Critic. It annoys me that you kept trying to put sense into this movie, when it's clearly suppose to be tongue-in-cheek, as homage to classic adventure serials. Besides, isn't the ENJOYMENT value of the movie more important than the quality? By the way, this was a PREQUEL.

    You should also appreciate this movie for taking risks instead of rehashing the same shit. What made Crystal Skull fail was that it severely toned down the grittiness and realism, as well as letting Lucas smear his trademark shit CGI into things. Watch the Red Letter Media review of it and you'll see how much Temple of Doom is far superior in terms of enjoyment.

    I do admit, Crystal Skull gave us fans something new to complain about.
  • Moreno X  - To MasterofHorses93
    Ha! Yeah. Imagine that if Crystal Skull didn't need to be made, Temple of Doom would arguably be the worst of the franchise and will get fans alike to nitpick the heck of it. Of course, Crystal Skull came along and so the criticism was instead thrown onto that film instead of Temple of Doom. Must've regain it's favor and popularity with the other two Indy films, considered the best trilogy as a whole and, what's been said and done, the rest is history. Ironic and surreal, isn't it?
  • doggans
    avatar
    // Besides, isn't the ENJOYMENT value of the movie more important than the quality?//

    I'm not sure what you mean by this. Some people can enjoy "low-quality" things, some people can't. And regardless of "quality", some of us find it really hard to enjoy Kate Capshaw.

    //By the way, this was a PREQUEL.//

    Which actually causes the BIGGEST problem with this movie that the Critic didn't even mention: by exposing Indy to supernatural elements before Raiders, it contradicts his character arc in Raiders from a skeptic who "doesn't believe in magic, a lot of superstitious hocus pocus" to a believer in the power of the supernatural.

    //What made Crystal Skull fail was that it severely toned down the grittiness and realism//

    The grittiness and realism of the over-the-top not-taking-itself- seriously movie serial homage?

    //Watch the Red Letter Media review of it and you'll see how much Temple of Doom is far superior in terms of enjoyment.//

    "Enjoyment" is a subjective term. There's no universal quantification of enjoyment. RLM might be able to point out what THEY find unenjoyable about Crystal Skull, and they might even be able to point out why it's "low-quality", but that doesn't necessarily have any bearing on what Doug finds enjoyable.
  • MK24
    I really liked this review; Its nice to see two different viewpoints conflict with each other, though one side was freezeframed for a good chunk of the review. My main qualm was the fact that you used the wrong music for the cart scene; without the correct Minecart Madness music, it just seems like a case of "Pacman Fever" (TV Tropes reference, of course). Still a great review nonetheless.
  • Tsumefan
    avatar
    Oh lord, I've been waiting for you to take a stab at this movie for a while. Well, at least ever since Crystal Skull came out...That movie was horrible. *shudders*
    Anyway, this movie was silly even back then but I suppose there are a few things to admire it for but it was fun for what it was worth, so even though its a little ridiculous at times, it's actually fun.
    Great review as always and can't wait for the next one :)
  • opsz
    I agree, this movie sucks.
  • LikaLaruku
    avatar
    He's got a damn good point. But this wasn't the only 80s movie to have a woman ruin the entire 3ed movie: Back to the Future 3.

    IJ3: Shrieking harpy, my only real gripe with the movie. I actually liked the kid, even though I usually don;t like kids.

    BttF3: Disney style romance doesn't suspend my disbelief, failure to adhere to the Bros Before Hoes rule. Thank gawd Telltale managed to get around without including her.
  • Mucca
    avatar
    Temple of Doom is IJ2, IJ3 would be Last Crusade.
  • AVPGuyver21
    avatar
    Great review as always!
  • qazox
    avatar
    One of the 10 best action movies from the 1980's and continued a great (except for #4) franchise.

    One of the few movies I will watch from whatever point it's at until the end.

    Yes some people hate this movie, but I don't.
  • nunouno001  - FINALLY!
    I hatred temple of doom so much, mainly because willy and short run ruined it for me. They are so painfully annoying, that in my opinion they're worse than Jar Jar! Yeah I said it! The plot is just ridiclous and the story is just so out of place. Crystal Skull ( I HATRED SHIA LE BEOUF)(PS I DON'T CARE IF I SPELLED HIS NAME WRONG!) was okay and almost good.
  • Vismutti
    avatar
    Oh I agree, at least the chick is waaaay more annoying than Jar Jar. JJ was stupid, clumsy, useless and had an annoying accent but at least he was somewhat sympathetic in that he wasn't trying to be difficult. He's like a five-year-old, or a special needs person: he can't help it and it's not his fault, it's the heroes's fault for bringing him with them in the first place. Willie isn't clumsy or even that stupid, she's just a self-centered prissy bitch and a walking bad female stereotype. She's more like a joke about women than a real woman.

    The kid is at least trying and he's actually being useful every now and then so he's better than either of them.

    Still, logically the fault falls on Indy here too. Why didn't he just recruit some young, fit lad from that Indian village where the children had been stolen from? And leave the child and the annoying singer there. Or at least Willie. Short Round was at least somewhat useful even though it's blatantly criminal and immoral to employ a child on a dangerous mission. Or couldn't he just find anyone decent who could speak English in that village?
  • Zargon  - What???
    avatar
    Really? There's tons of bad movies out there you can do a critic on, but you choose a movie that many people like? Sure it has it's campy and unreal situations, but what action/adventure movie doesn't? It just perplexes me that you would do a negative review of one of the classic Indy movies, its like doing a review of Return of the Jedi and nitpicking out all of the parts you think are silly. What I'm saying is that you shouldn't waste your time making a critic for a movie people love and adore, give the bad movies the criticism they deserve, not the good ones.
  • Gigakoops
    avatar
    Sorry, but I don't get this logic. Why shouldn't someone make a review for a film they don't like that others do? I would prefer he reviewed a film others see as good once in a blue moon as opposed to only reviewing obviously bad films. These kinds of reviews give people a different perspective of the films they hold dear, and if you have a sense of humor, you can laugh along if the jokes are good.
  • Kumi
    avatar
    I agree. It can be a lot more interesting to hear a critique of a film that most people like, as the jokes and the points are more likely to be less predictable.

    As long as they're able to come up with good material for it, I'm happy to hear the critic review any film.
  • Bloodrealm
    Lots of critics make fun of things they like. I see where you're coming from, but it's it's not really a valid point here.
  • Mucca
    avatar
    Wait, you're reviewing an Indiana Jones movie?
    (Mental blue screen of death)
  • Moreno X
    Well, it's like what 80s Dan says: this film - despite of over-the-top silly movie - does play straight forward and doesn't dumb down it's setting. It took risks to go to areas that we individually lower our high standards (nitpicking) about movies like this and countless others that are guilty pleasure, unlike Kingdom of the Crystal Skull that has less risks and wasn't bold enough to be comfortable to tell what it wanted tell a story presented in Indy 4. Temple of Doom knew what it want to tell and it stick to it thus made a memorable, fun, stupid, loud movie that has characters that I'm fine with. I watch films that has annoying characters and made it through; no compliants. Which it also shows you that I can make it through the Star Wars Prequels...including Indy 4.

    Personally, so far, I have a feeling that I think we've reach to a point that fans/viewers can get so passionate they'll get personally and attack any person - critic and reviewer alike - just so no one will never touch or talk negativity about aspects of their favorite franchises - franchises that they nowadays treat them like something they literally worship them. Sometimes fanboys (and trolls) are weird and scary. No wonder I read recently about the heated debate of critics and fanboys aren't getting along over at Rotten Tomatoes.

    Aside from that (off topic, sorry), I like the film and I know it's predictable. Thanks for the review NC.

    NOTE: at the minecart scenes, I too look at it and wonder if it would be cool to play Donkey Kong Country music...and when you played it, I was right :D Thanks Doug, you're the best man!
  • ManWithGoodTaste
    avatar
    About time you reviewed a good movie, Doug!
  • Semudara
    avatar
    It's not his first one. He reviews plenty of good movies, as long as there's lots of stuff to make fun of.
  • 3rdworld
    To quote Stewie Griffin from the Family Guy movie "Lady only here cause she humping directer." So if you want to blame anyone, blame Spielberg for whoring out the role of love interest.
  • AlphaMail
    That's stupid, he was dating the actress not the character, if someone else had got the role it would have been the same, it wasn't a case of bad acting it was her character that certain people (not me) had a problem with.
  • Drake Clawfang
    Zargon, that is an incredibly stupid comment. Who cares if the film has a fandom behind it, if it's a bad movie he wants to review, he can review it, it's not the first time he's reviewed a movie people liked but he hated and it won't be the last.

    And by the way, since you brought up up Star wars, Episode IV sucks the big one.
  • AlphaMail
    You're obviously 12 and don't know any better. Don't comment on things you know nothing about.
  • Zargon
    avatar
    You just lost all credibility there, chummer
  • sophronia_chaos
    avatar
    Awesome video, Critic! And I thought I was the only person who couldn't fucking stand Willie. I love Raiders and Last Crusade, but I couldn't even get through Temple of Doom. She is definitely a hell of a lot worse than Jubilee in term of dumbassery-in-distress (dumbass-in-distressery?) .

    Also...Shiva. The god of DESTRUCTION. Is the good god. Errrrr what? Kali is often portrayed as destructive, but seriously, both Shiva and Kali have fairly ambivalent natures. Oh, and Shiva is Kali's consort. And there's a legend about Kali breastfeeding an infant Shiva. Just throwing that out there.
  • Zargon
    avatar
    @Gigakoopas Because the critic has a sort of personality that if he reviews a movie and points out faults, other people see those faults, and proccede to dislike that movie. Usually the perspective people get from this is that of "Oh, the critic said that's a bad movie, so it is!" See what I mean?
  • Gigakoops
    avatar
    Again, it's all about perspective. If you loved a movie before the review, even after viewing it, if you still like the film after seeing these flaws, then it means that your opinions differ.

    I don't necessarily buy the "If the NC doesn't like it, people sway their opinion" train of thought. I see all the time people saying "Great review, but I still love this movie" with almost all of the NC reviews for bigger films. It's quite different when he reviews a film lots of people like, because they'll still like it after the review.

    So in short, I don't see how that's a reason not to review a film everyone else likes.
  • Axel Osbourne
    avatar
    "@Gigakoopas Because the critic has a sort of personality that if he reviews a movie and points out faults, other people see those faults, and proccede to dislike that movie. Usually the perspective people get from this is that of "Oh, the critic said that's a bad movie, so it is!" See what I mean?"

    Yeah, and so what? A, you just admitted the movie has flaws, B, Why the hell should any movie be above criticism: even Twilight (which is legitimately horrible) has it's fans and nobody thinks twice about going after that? So why should the movies you like get a pass, fair is fair. C, anybody, ANYBODY who actually stops liking something they love, or rather pretends they don't like it because the Nostalgia Critic (Who isn't even a real person) told them they weren't aloud to like it, is a GOD DAMN MORON! And if they are really that weak minded and easliy lead, then we don't need to worry about Temple of Doom so much as worry about how these dimwits can ever elect a good leader!
  • AlphaMail
    Criticism is one thing, but this was more of a Witch hunt, where only the Critics idea of bad parts were talked about, it wasn't a fair review, it was wholly one sided, and I don't count 80's Dan, and Twilight is a new movie and does suck, don't ever compare it to Indiana Jones, hell even the fans hate Bella. as for your point C if you don't know that this can happen then you are the moron, it's called advertising and PR and spin doctoring and loads of other names. Plus this show is supposed to be entertaining not inflaming, Sociopaths like you might like it but it's unfair to the other Fans of the Nostalgia Critic.
  • theseventhdoctor
    "Plus this show is supposed to be entertaining not inflaming, Sociopaths like you might like it but it's unfair to the other Fans of the Nostalgia Critic."



    ...

    ...

    You can't be serious...
  • Axel Osbourne
    avatar
    "Criticism is one thing, but this was more of a Witch hunt, where only the Critics idea of bad parts were talked about, it wasn't a fair review, it was wholly one sided"

    And that's diffrent from his other reviews, how?

    "and Twilight is a new movie and does suck, don't ever compare it to Indiana Jones"

    I just did, what are you going do about it, BITCH!

    Besides, my point was that Twilight has a lot of fan too, and they probably don't like it being criticized, but that's not an excuse to leave it alone (nor should it be) but to have no problem with that, but cry fowl when it's a movie you like is just hypocritical. And yes, he's picked on movies I like before (Child's Play, IT, Halloween 3) I just don't get bent out of shape about it.

    "as for your point C if you don't know that this can happen then you are the moron, it's called advertising and PR and spin doctoring and loads of other names'

    I didn't say it doesn't happen, I just said they were morons, and I stand by that statement. It frankly saddens me that nobody can think for themselve anymore, and need a commercial or the media or a politician to tell them what to think (but that's a diffrent argument, so I'll move on)

    "Sociopaths like you might like it but it's unair to the other Fans of the Nostalgia Critic"

    REALLY? Sociopaths? Not having a problem with an Indian Jones review makes me a sociopath? Do I even need to keep arguing, I think you just forfeited!



    l
  • Zargon
    avatar
    You just went full retard, someone has an opinion, and you lose your shit.
    Stop being so butthurt an let others have their own thoughts. Okay, Wilie can be annoying, as well as Short Round, but don't harp on it throught te whole movie, and as I said before, some of the things in ToD may har seemed stupid, like the raft, but it has happene on other Indy movies, like the evil ghosts coming out of the ark, someone turning old an dying in a couple of seconds, Indy being shot at hundreds of times but never killing him. You can't base a whole negative review on just a couple of annoying things.
  • Axel Osbourne
    avatar
    "You just went full retard, someone has an opinion, and you lose your shit.
    Stop being so butthurt an let others have their own thoughts."

    Oh, I haven't lost my shit, in fact, I think this whole thing is funny. And let's not forget that this all started because you seem to believe The Critic doesn't have the right to go after movies people like, which means you're the one who has a problem with people having their own opinions. Practise what you preach, Okay.

    "You can't base a whole negative review on just a couple of annoying things."

    THAT WHAT HE ALWAYS DOES! With EVERY MOVIE! You feeling me? The whole point is comedy, it's a character who nitpicks things to death and can't stand when people don't agree with him! And it amazes me that people only seem to have a problem with it when it's a movie they like. I'm fine with opinions, as long as it goes both ways. You think he's wrong sometimes, fine, I do that to, but don't demand that he shut up and not speak his mind, then hide behind opinion.
  • Zargon
    avatar
    Oh, so it's all funny to you, so then why you seem so mad and attack anyone who thinks different? Anyway, in other reviews he dosn't just base it on nitpicks, like in his Battlefield Earth review, he just does not cOmplain throughout the whole movie about the aliens, I don't know, hair or something, he explains logical plot holes and such.
    You're being a huge hypocrit as of now, I said he shouldn't waste his time making reviews about movies people like, I never said I'm going to slit his throat and murder his family if he doesn't take my idea, it was a thought, not a command
  • Axel Osbourne
    avatar
    "Stop acting like NC is a god and let some people have their own ideas."

    I will when you stop demanding he leave ceirtain movies alone.
  • Zargon
    avatar
    Demand? Can you not read? In my last post I said t was an OPINON, not a COMMAND, and certain movies? I don't think I have a criminal record of me complaining about movies he reviews, this is the first one.
  • Axel Osbourne
    avatar
    Yes I can read and this is what you said:

    "What I'm saying is that you shouldn't waste your time making a critic for a movie people love and adore, give the bad movies the criticism they deserve, not the good ones."

    That would have been cool, if a little pushy, but you followed it up with:

    "@Gigakoopas Because the critic has a sort of personality that if he reviews a movie and points out faults, other people see those faults, and proccede to dislike that movie. Usually the perspective people get from this is that of "Oh, the critic said that's a bad movie, so it is!" See what I mean?"

    So it would seem that not only do you have a problem with him expressing his opinion, but think he should not be allowed to speak him mind if it means he might change peoples mind, and that's where I have a problem.

    All that said, I think I should say that I only disagree with you. I don't know if you noticed, but I've been having two arguments today, and I want to make it clear that my, less friendly comments, are directed at him. So if some of that blead over into this discussion, I'm sorry, but I just don't think anything should be off limits as far as review.
  • Zargon
    avatar
    I'm not saying he can't speak his mind, I'm saying that if he wants to do a review on a movie that everyone agrees that is decent, he shouldn't bash it as much, seeing other people reactions to this review as well. And he doesn't really "express" his opinion, he kinda states that it's a bad movie and no one sees why, if it was him expressing his opinion it wouldn't be a Nostalgia Critic review, it would be more of Doug just talking about the movie, not in character.
    You can have you thoughts about it, I like to keep to my ideas, and I'm not going to change it. And thank you for being attempting to act kind
  • Greenjackspeaks
    maybe HE doesn't agree that it's decent, and was pointing out the things that he didn't like about it. the main supporting cast being annoying is a big issue. they're there throughout the whole movie and if they're annoying it will drive many people to change which movie they're watching. furthermore, he never said that it was really a bad movie in general, just that it had some things that made it sub par in comparison to the other indiana jones movies. basically he was pointing out how crystal skull was not the only movie to have issues from that series, and many of his "nitpicks" were him indirectly comparing things in Temple of Doom to crystal skull. also, if you think he's got a "responsibility" to not speak his mind because people value his opinion then you obviously don't know what the first amendment was about.
  • AlphaMail
    Says the sheep who follows Critic like a love sick puppy and has no thought of his own, I liked those other movies too, but if you review something you have to do it from both sides not just your own.

    You're a sociopath because you like to argue with anyone who likes the movie just because you didn't, learn the definition idiot.

    Plus your point about Twilight was stupid, and made no sense, if you're going to pick a movie choose one that works, if you were older and smarter you would know this. Twilight is not a classic.

    As for what I'm gonna do about it, well I don't have to do anything, the fact you think they are the same just shows how stupid you are, BITCH. "I think you just forfeited" to quote a moron.
  • Axel Osbourne
    avatar
    "You're a sociopath because you like to argue with anyone who likes the movie just because you didn't, learn the definition idiot."

    Alright, let's look at the definition:

    SOCIOPATH: a person with a psychopathic personality whose behavior is antisocial, often criminal, and who lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience.

    Yeah, that's sounds like what I'm doing alright (Wink)

    "Says the sheep who follows Critic like a love sick puppy and has no thought of his own, I liked those other movies too, but if you review something you have to do it from both sides not just your own."

    So you felt the same way about the Batman and Robin review, right? Because he did that there as well

    "Plus your point about Twilight was stupid, and made no sense"

    Well, I'm sorry my point is so difficult for you to understand, I'll try one more time, but it's probably a waste. Any movie, or book, whatever is subject to interpretation, criticims, or spoof (which is where the critic comes in) And it's all fair, until you make a distinction about what is ok to go after and what is not. Oh, and for the record, I did like Temple of Doom, but I refuse to believe it's this sacred cow that must never be touched.

    Please keep going though, messing with you is just to much fun.
  • AlphaMail
    Oh so you were messing with me, sorry, I thought you were being serious, if you weren't being serious that must mean all of your points were fake too, that's good to know. Oh and "Antisocial" no "Social Conscience" yup that's you alright.
  • singitjohnny
    avatar
    "You're a sociopath because you like to argue with anyone who likes the movie just because you didn't, learn the definition idiot."

    This is a joke, right?

    You can't really believe that a sociopath is defined as someone who argues about movies?

    The combination of supercilious tone and general ignorance is so perfect here, I really, honestly can't tell if you're trolling or not.
  • AlphaMail
    Who said that's what I thought it was? It couldn't possibly be because he's loving arguing with people and causing trouble. Arguing is one thing, doing so just to stir trouble which he's admitted to be doing is trolling and sociopathic.
  • Axel Osbourne
    avatar
    "Who said that's what I thought it was? It couldn't possibly be because he's loving arguing with people and causing trouble. Arguing is one thing, doing so just to stir trouble which he's admitted to be doing is trolling and sociopathic."

    Well, that's partially true: I enjoy agruing with people who ARE causing trouble. I started by telling Zargon I didn't agree with his opinion, and giving my reasons and you FLIP THE FUCK OUT! So from there I was more than happy to keep pushing your buttons because you were being way to sesitive about a movie.

    And all my point were very real.
  • AlphaMail
    Oh so when I disagree with you it's "flipping the Fuck out" nice use of words there by the way, but when you disagree with someone it's because they are "causing trouble" Considering you're the one who likes to use bold letters and swear, you should reevaluate just who is "flipping the fuck out"

    You were trolling someone for the sake of trolling, don't try and change it now that people know and make it sound like you were in the right. Plus the fact that you said you liked this movie proves you were just trolling.

    Plus points can't be real if they don't exist.
  • Axel Osbourne
    avatar
    "Oh so when I disagree with you it's "flipping the Fuck out" nice use of words there by the way, but when you disagree with someone it's because they are "causing trouble" Considering you're the one who likes to use bold letters and swear, you should reevaluate just who is "flipping the fuck out"

    So calling someone a sociopath is diagreeing with them? Huh, I've had the wrong idea all this time.

    " Considering you're the one who likes to use bold letters and swear, you should reevaluate just who is "flipping the fuck out"

    What's wrong with that? It's a way to emphasis certaint words or feelings, and let me point out that the first time I "crused and used caps" was not directed at anyone in pactiular, but at people in genral that are easliy swayd by the words of a celebrity, but YOU, for what ever reason decided the best way to make your point was to start calling me names, so yeah, I tthink you picked this fight.

    "You were trolling someone for the sake of trolling, don't try and change it now"

    No, I was trolling because you were asking for it.

    "From the start you've just been trolling anyone who disagrees with Critics opinions, while stating people are entitled to their opinions, in other words you were "causing trouble"

    Two people, I've talked to TWO PEOPLE TODAY!

    "Oh and if you are trolling people don't tell them you are, because now I don't give a damn about anything you say because it's just the ravings of someone who wants attentions, "shoo fly don't bother me".

    But I thought we were getting along!
  • AlphaMail
    From the start you've just been trolling anyone who disagrees with Critics opinions, while stating people are entitled to their opinions, in other words you were "causing trouble" and being a hypocrite so don't try to act like you're anything more than a degenerate troll. Oh and if you are trolling people don't tell them you are, because now I don't give a damn about anything you say because it's just the ravings of someone who wants attentions, "shoo fly don't bother me".
  • Greenjackspeaks
    "Sociopathy is the result of social conditioning which leads to a lack of natural human values. It refers strictly to a social condition where a person knows, yet has been socially conditioned to disregard, the intrinsic human values which are believed to be universal." ~wikipedia
    you need to learn what a sociopath is, not axel.
    Also, use a logical equation: subject A has many fans, subject B also has many fans, we are discussing the nature of reviewing something with a fanbase, so in that regard subject A is equal to subject B. axel is right, you are a moron, and my neutral opinion of you has been lowered into a moderate dislike. I personally liked this movie, but I'm willing to listen to NC's CRITICISMS of the movie. he's called NOSTALGIA Critic, not BAD EIGHTIES AND NINETIES MARKETING PLOY Critic. he reviews stuff that is kinda old news, that many people remember from their youth, either fondly or not. he gives criticism of the movie, which does not require him to say the good things, only what he had issues with. he expressed what they could have done differently in a comedic fashion, so why are you complaining?
  • AlphaMail
    Trolling is considered Sociopathic moron, look it up don't just copy and paste from wiki like an idiot, a sociopath is also anyone who likes attacking people through words, which is what trolling is, plus my beef wasn't so much with the movie or the critic but with the fact that Axel was attacking anyone who didn't like the video while stating people are allowed to express their own opinions.

    Twilight is new and Temple of Doom is a classic idiot, so no they are not the same, you can't compare something that just came out to something that is twenty years old, amount of fans had nothing to do with it, it's about how it is received when it has become dated, my opinion of you has gone from not having one to mild irritation at how flawed and childish your comment was.
    You should call yourself Greenjackbabbles.
  • Me
    avatar
    well clearly all they have to understand is "Nostalgia Critic for President"
  • pinky75910
    avatar
    Did Critic's review change your opinion of the movie?
  • cvrpapc  - oh gawd
    avatar
    @ zargon
    Doug is playing a character - who dislikes everything; its a troupe, a farce, whatever you want to call it. I've been watching since he was on youtube. The trouble starts when people can't seem to separate the man from the character he plays. That's just weird. Its entertainment. It silly. He has said on many occasions that its all opinion. That people should just have fun with it.

    As far as "changing" opinions, I don't know. That seems like a generalization. Personally, I have never seen anyone change their opinion on the comments because of that. I've seen people agree/disagree.

    For example, I like this movie. I see the flaws. I won't stop liking it either. I still watched the review and found it funny. But then again, I'm 30, boring, and I think Fox News jokes are hilarious.
  • Zargon
    avatar
    I know, I know, but still, I can't really enjoy someone when they're making sometimes unfunny, and/or confusing jokes, as I have been reading from the comments, it seems he may have made some factual mistakes in this one as well, don't get me wrong, NC is a great show, and I look forward to a new one every week, but when videos like this come out, doing a review of a movie that is usually considered "good" by most people, rather than a video of something downright terrible, I don't know, I just can't see Doug doing reviews of good movies, like if he did one of Jaws, I would totally flip my shit, It was kind of a shock to me that he would review this and not something else, that's all.
  • Greenjackspeaks
    I'd love to see NC review Jaws. that movie might be good, but it's got plenty of exploitable problems with it, as do all spielberg films.
  • Archedgar
    I like Temple of Doom.

    Yes, the female love interest is useless, but it was top notch schlock entertainment and this cannot be denied.

    Brad Jones ftw.
  • Kumi
    avatar
    The head bobbing as Brad's group fought to keep their frozen poses really got me laughing. They did a good job keeping still regardless, though!
Only registered users can write comments!

Follow us on:

Latest Videos

RC: Whatta Man by Salt N Pepa

Watch Video

Brad: So What's the Deal

Watch Video

iRawss: GH - Reggie's Prayer

Watch Video

Dan O: FI - Tell Me a Story

Watch Video

Film Brain: Pride (2014)

Watch Video

Nerd: Ep 128 Korra Book 3

Watch Video

NChick: Starscream

Watch Video

MikeJ: X-Files 2

Watch Video

Beth: Shark Jumping - Smash

Watch Video

Word Funk: I Know What You Did

Watch Video

Brad: No Good Deed

Watch Video

Nerd: Ep 127 - Fine Young

Watch Video

Brad: The Apple

Watch Video

Phelous: The Grudge

Watch Video

Vangelus: Masterpiece

Watch Video

Lotus: Road Avenger

Watch Video

NC: Top 11 Worst Avatar Episodes

Watch Video

SciFi Guy w NC: The 6th Day

Watch Video

Leon Thomas: Noah

Watch Video

SGIK: Perspective Man

Watch Video

LAG: YKW - Robot of Sherwood

Watch Video

Shaun K: Wii Retrospective

Watch Video

Linkara: Sonic Super Special #7

Watch Video

See NC Editorials Early

Watch Video

MikeJ: Wax Vac

Watch Video

Suede: Animenia - Ace Attorney

Watch Video

Film Brain: The Guest

Watch Video

Todd: Shake it Off by Taylor Swift

Watch Video

BB: Tarzan 3D

Watch Video

Ursa: SYL - Stardust

Watch Video

Blog Categories

What's Up? (141)
Sports (264)
News (280)
Book Reviews (560)
Funny (581)
Top # Lists (746)
Animation (948)
Wrestling (1002)
Movies (1076)
Anime (1119)
Thoughts (1171)
Comics (1237)
Misc Reviews (1327)
Music (1456)
Video Reviews (1973)
Film Review (2767)
Uncategorized (4050)
Video Games (5293)
Old Blogs (15309)