I don't know if anyone checks the link section despite the number of times I've asked people to, but you'll notice a link to a video site I've labeled as "The Nostalgia Critic."
The Nostalgia Critic character is caustic and obnoxious, but he is (with a handful of exceptions) fair with the points of his criticism. He's given negative reviews to many movies that I love, but out of the dozens of such films I only found he was unfair with two or three. The flaws are there and the jokes make sense. I still love the movies themselves, but I have something new to laugh at.
This week's review was of "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom." I thought he was going to rip the Lucas hypocrites a new one, and he started to. However, very quickly he started to go back on himself to appease the hateboys.
First, a quick summary.
Like Episodes I-III (and in all probability because of them), "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" has been mercilessly bashed for "flaws" that were in full force in the other three films. Except "Skull" had alien technology instead of magic (oh noes!).
I don't consider myself an Indiana Jones fanatic by any stretch, but I do enjoy the movies. I think Raiders and Crusade are the best and Skull, though I've only been able to see it once, is very much a close third. The one I'm not very fond of is "Temple of Doom."
Let me make a few things very clear. First off, Temple of Doom legit scared me as a kid and I still get uncomfortable at much of the Thuggie Cult scenes (especially with the tearing out of the hearts and whatnot). Second, I would not go so far as to say I "hate" ToD, as I do appreciate the Lucasness and the Spielbergness of it, and it is an Indiana Jones movie for all intents and purposes. However, I don't get quite as into it as I do the other three and I usually do skip it when I feel like an Indy marathon. Indy himself does have a little bit more out-of-character moments, but then again I'm not the screenwriters so I'm sure it makes sense on some level.
But, much like IV-VI, Temple of Doom is placed on a high pedestal and Crystal Skull is knocked down in the dirt. In his review, NC start calling people out on this. I was elated to have them put in their place.
Then it all started going downhill.
It began when Short Round entered the picture. NC commented on how he was an annoying racist stereotype and proceeded to perpetuate the Great Jar Jar Racism Lie as a throwaway gag. Shortly after, a guest cameo stated "At least he's no Jake Lloyd." Let me tell you something right now: Jake Lloyd, for all his faults, still gave a much better performance than Jonathan Ke Quan. Quan, who NC himself criticises shouts all of his lines, and yet because of this and his role in "The Goonies" was listed on VH1's Top 100 Kid Stars.
On a similar note, you're going to call Jar Jar movie-ruiningly annoying but you'll let Kate Capshaw's "Willie" off the hook (NC doesn't, thankfully, but still downs the Binks)?
At the end of the review, NC gives in and admits that for all its faults, ToD was at least memorable, and states that "It's better to have bad things and be memorable [Tod] than be average and forgettable [CS]"
You're going to call Crystal Skull "Forgettable"? I remember more of CS from one viewing several years ago than I do from ToD after multiple viewings over many years.
Even then, I'm not going to "disown" Temple. Again, it's still an Indiana Jones flick. But the whole point of NC is to get past the veil of nostalgia and really take a critical eye to movies. Like Star Wars, all the Indiana Jones movies have similar strengths and similar weaknesses. You can prefer one to another, but it's the same 30's throwback in all ten cases and either you appreciate that or you don't. If you give a pass to an older installment that you don't to the newer one, then you're being just as blind as you call everyone else.