Continuity mistake: When Indy tries to grab the antidote vial from the table, in the closeup just as the vial falls off the table the camera follows the vial as it lands in the empty area to the left of Lao Che's chair where Kao Kan's chair should be, but it's not, and the rug's edge with wood floor beside Lao Che's chair though it shouldn't be. Then Indy hits Kao Kan who is again seated closely to Lao Che's left, as he should be, and when Kao Kan falls backward we see the rug edge is nowhere near Lao Che's chair, also as it should be. (00:08:20)
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984)
Ending / spoiler
Directed by: Steven Spielberg
Starring: Harrison Ford, Kate Capshaw, Jonathan Ke Quan, Amrish Puri, David Yip
Indy gets the magic stone back from the bad guys.
Jack
More mistakes in Indiana Jones and the Temple of DoomMore quotes from Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom
Trivia: Just like Indiana was named after George Lucas' dog, Willie was named after Steven Spielberg's dog and Short Round was named after screenwriters Bill Hyuck and Gloria Hatz's dog.
Question: Why did Spielberg make Temple of Doom a prequel to Raiders of the Lost Ark? I read somewhere that he didn't want to make the Nazis the villains again, but that wouldn't be a problem since the Nazis never went to India or China.
Answer: This is conjecture, but it seems the general function of setting Temple of Doom before Raiders of the Lost Ark is that it helps set audience expectations that the two movies are self-contained episodes. For instance, Karen Allen has said she wasn't disappointed about not being asked to return because she'd already been told that the next installment was being set in the past before her character is reunited with Indy. Conversely, since we're already aware Raiders makes no mention of the events of Temple of Doom, we know we shouldn't necessarily expect any further installments to continue directly from prior movies' storylines regardless if they are set forward in time.
Chosen answer: It was actually George Lucas who wrote the story, made it a prequel, and has stated it was because he didn't want the Nazis to be the villains again. The idea most likely seems if it wasn't a prequel, the Nazis could still be after Jones, even in China or India. But alas, there is really no other insight as to Lucas' prequel decision.
Join the mailing list
Separate from membership, this is to get updates about mistakes in recent releases. Addresses are not passed on to any third party, and are used solely for direct communication from this site. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Check out the mistake & trivia books, on Kindle and in paperback.
Suggested correction: Actually it appears the vial falls to the left of Kao Ken's chair, not Lao Che's. It appears after Indy pierces the other guy with the shishkebab, Kao Ken, off camera, takes the vial and puts on his left side. Indy jumps on the table and after missing the vial he slides further and then elbows Kao Ken who is on the right side now. The vial is still on the left side of Kao Ken's chair when it's kicked onto the wooden floor.
lionhead
You're very much mistaken. Lao Che is wearing an embroidered dinner jacket and has a pinky ring on his left pinky, and Kao Kan's left hand is bandaged in gauze. After Indy skewers Chen, in the closeup of Indy's hand just as it knocks the vial off the table, it's Lao Che's hand (note the pinky ring, etc) that we see on the table next to Nurhachi's urn, the stack of money, and the vial. That is not Kao Kan's hand/arm, remember his left hand is bandaged. And as this closeup continues to pan down it follows the vial as it lands on the floor in the empty space where Kao Kan's chair should be, but it isn't.
Super Grover ★
Yep, you're right I see it. There are 2 shots of Indy trying to grab the vial off the table and the second one is followed through with the vial falling off it and that one is wrong. Alright.