Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom v's Star Trek III
- Thread starter Sulu
- Start date
I love both of those films dearly, but I too might give a slight edge to Indy, mostly based on the fact that it's just a more lavish production. I also don't understand the hate for either movie. Star Trek III is a very solid sequel and I like Temple of Doom just as much as Raiders.
I saw them both in their initial runs, first week in the theaters. I loved Trek III. Indy not so much. (I loved Raiders and saw it several times in the theater). Trek III built so strongly on Trek II. Indy was a prequel and seemed to be just a bunch of stunts strung together. It didn't have the same "grit" that Raiders had. Add to that the screaming of the female lead (Innn-deeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee) every few seconds and I personally hate little kid sidekicks. Raiders did a great job of helping me suspend my disbelief and ToD just seemed to stretch that ability to disbelive. It still had lots of fun and cool sequences but seemed to play them off for humor. (I personally only re-watch Raiders and Last Crusade.) Trek III had me at the scene where they stole Enterprise.
Temple of Doom. I thought Trek 3 was a bit of a mess.
I'm with you on not understanding the hate Star Trek III gets. That's the second best Kirk movie behind IV. Temple of Doom however, is, hands down, the worst film of the Indiana Jones series. Voodoo stories are ALWAYS stupid. Hell, even Speilberg is on record as hating it.
Neither was very good
ToD > ST3
ToD > ST3
Like'em both.
I like Star Trek III, not the best of the original series movies but it has a lot of really memorable moments, most notably the theft of the Enterprise, the death of Kirk's son, the destruction of the Enterprise, the fight on Genesis and the resurrection of Spock on Vulcan.
I find "Temple of Doom" to be rather blah, but then outside of the first one, I can't say I've ever been a fan of the Indiana Jones series.
I find "Temple of Doom" to be rather blah, but then outside of the first one, I can't say I've ever been a fan of the Indiana Jones series.
Temple Of Doom by a long way. Both are a big comedown from their immediate predecessors. Ghostbusters and The Terminator kick the shit out of both of them...
It's actually quite simple. In order to prop up the "only even numbered ST films are good" fallacy, ST III got thrown under the bus.
Apples and oranges.
I prefer apples.
ST3 is better as part of a series. Genesis planet sets look like sets, though. Recasting Saavik was annoying (but it was that or no Saavik). But Mark Lenard was back as Sarek.
Temple of Doom is better as a stand alone movie. As part of a series it's a tad odd that Indy witnesses the power of the Shankara stones but seems unsure about the supernatural aspects of the Ark...until the end.
Kate Capshaw is horrible. Spielberg must've cast her because was really good at something besides acting...
Movie spends too much time underground, too. Seem stagnant compared to Raiders. But still a better overall production than ST3.
Both films have decent villains. Tie.
Most memorable scenes:
Destruction of Enterprise vs. disgusting dinner (chilled monkey brains!).
Come of think of it, most of the memorable scenes in ToD were retarded. Sure Spock coming back was odd...(why does regenerated Spock stop aging?), but the destruction of the Enterprise was tragically awesome.
Winner: Star Trek 3, but marginally...
I prefer apples.
ST3 is better as part of a series. Genesis planet sets look like sets, though. Recasting Saavik was annoying (but it was that or no Saavik). But Mark Lenard was back as Sarek.
Temple of Doom is better as a stand alone movie. As part of a series it's a tad odd that Indy witnesses the power of the Shankara stones but seems unsure about the supernatural aspects of the Ark...until the end.
Kate Capshaw is horrible. Spielberg must've cast her because was really good at something besides acting...
Movie spends too much time underground, too. Seem stagnant compared to Raiders. But still a better overall production than ST3.
Both films have decent villains. Tie.
Most memorable scenes:
Destruction of Enterprise vs. disgusting dinner (chilled monkey brains!).
Come of think of it, most of the memorable scenes in ToD were retarded. Sure Spock coming back was odd...(why does regenerated Spock stop aging?), but the destruction of the Enterprise was tragically awesome.
Winner: Star Trek 3, but marginally...
Huh. l don't think l ever realised that ToD took place before Raiders.
Anyhoo, l gotta go with Trek 3. Christopher Lloyd was one of the greatest Klingons EVER, and l guess l'm in the minority but l kind of prefer Robin Curtis as Saavik over Kirsty.
They're both decent movies, but neither of them were the best (or worst) in their respective franchises.
Anyhoo, l gotta go with Trek 3. Christopher Lloyd was one of the greatest Klingons EVER, and l guess l'm in the minority but l kind of prefer Robin Curtis as Saavik over Kirsty.
They're both decent movies, but neither of them were the best (or worst) in their respective franchises.
Well, it's aout damn time! I thought I was the only person in the universe who preferred Robin to Kirstie. All my friends who are also Star Trek fans liked Alley better. Even my mom did, though, she wisely didn't say so when we met Robin at the convention we attended years back.
It's nice to know I'm not alone in this.
Temple of Doom easily. TSFS was alright but gloomy. ToD was just plain fun. Spielberg and Lucas vs. Nimoy and Bennett? Spielberg and Lucas wins every time!
ToD wasn't gloomy?
Both have their moments (good, bad, cheesy and ugly). My preference really depends on my mood. But I have more nostalgia for Trek III.
Both have their moments (good, bad, cheesy and ugly). My preference really depends on my mood. But I have more nostalgia for Trek III.
