Indiana Jones 2's Problematic Parts Defended by Short Round Actor

Silly boy - everything is racists these days. In fact, the word racist is racist. Me responding to your question makes me a racist.

Youre right about that but americans are also a bunch of pussies who cried white genocide and accuse of woke to anyone who made a negative depiction of the USA.

Some black actress plays a mermaid "is teh woke army"

The villain in some random spy movie is a white guy instead of an arab dude "is the jew propaganda trying to vilified white men"

Americans are ok with freedom of speech and "fun" and not take nothing too serious until they are the one eating monkey brain in a movie "that's not fun that's just racist and woke and part of the great replacement"

Not taking a postion on whether the film is racist or not, but some historical perspective might be useful here.

India is a lot like Mexico in that they were and probably still are hypersensitive about what types of foreign films they allow to filmed in their respective countries. Mexico after the Revolution in the 1920s and India since independence in 1947 basically have film commissions you have to submit your script to and they decide what they will allow to be depicted and also how to make changes to make the script more to their liking. I think the similarity between the Mola Ram character and the chief bad guy in the 1930s movie version of Gunga Din maybe have been an issue for the Indian government. In both cases, they were Tuggees. The movie Gunga Din was banned in Bombay and I think Calcutta - effectively meaning it wasn't shown in India since that's where most movie houses were.

So, why was the film Gunga Din so disliked by Indians when it was released in the 1930s? The movie Gunga Din was itself based on the poem Gunga Din by Rudyard Kipling, whom the Indians already didn't like. No mention of Tuggees appears in the Kipling story, because they had already been wiped out long before the historical events depitcted in the Kipling poem.

So, this was a choice made deliberately by the Hollywood studio that made it. Also, the Tuggee leader in that film also explicitly stated that his goal was to kick the British out of India, which was never a goal of the original historical Tuggees. They were a gang of fanatical bandits not revolutionaries. This rubbed the people in India the wrong way because in the 1930s Gandhi's passive resistance movement was reaching a critical phase. They saw the movie Gunga Din as a cheap shot that conflated the Tuggees with the burgeoning independence movement, which had nothing to do with Tuggees and vice verse.

Now, in Temple of Doom, Mola Ram's goal is to take over the entire Earth, so they didn't link it to independence, but evidently the Indians still didn't like it.

Lucas and Spielberg evidently submitted the script to the Indian film commission and it was rejected. They refused to make any changes so moved to Sri Lanka to make the film. Sri Lanka and India were having bad relations back in the early 80s so they were only to happy to host the Indy crew if only to spite India.

I wonder what changes Lucas and Spielberg would have made if the location in Sri Lanka wasn't available to them? They perhaps could have set the entire film in India, and perhaps had Short Round be a street urchin in Bombay or Calcutta. By making him an Indian character who had a strong personality and agency as a character it might (or maybe not) have gone someway to placate the government and its objections. I guess we'll never know.

Before we get into the racial issues, I would also say other countries have hoops you have to go through, officially or unofficially, if you want to make films in there. Israel would be a likely candidate, as would France. For instance, try, as a foreigner, making a film set in France during World War II that depicts Vichy collaborationists instead of heroic French Resistance fighters and see how much coopoeration you get (probably not much, although it might be a bit easier today now that most of that generation is no longer living).

"what is racists about temples of doom?"

Thousands of enslaved Indian men and children are unable to defeat their enslavers/torturers, but one WHITE MAN comes in and single-handedly defeats the slave holders and frees their prisoners. I believe the term is WHITE SAVIOR NARRATIVE.

Bingo.

yup.

and its a tiny minority of people .

.. and its no effort for them to put their shit on twitter .

If they had to write a letter with a pen and post it there would be none of this .

Sounds right to me.

Amen!

Then DON’T READ IT

Geez … wokesters get triggered and then YOU get triggered by them

Whining about their whining is STILL whining

Loser