Question: What happened to Short Round?
MikeH
8th Apr 2020
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984)
3rd Nov 2017
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984)
Stupidity: Lao Che's intention was to kill Indy. He had no intention of giving him the antidote. So then why would he bring a real antidote? Why not just fill it with something else instead? From his perspective, bringing a real antidote was a waste of time, and also very stupid in case Indy managed to get it, which he did. In fact, Lao Che could've brought a fake antidote and given it to Indy. He probably wouldn't have noticed the difference, and then there wouldn't have been a fight in which one of his men was killed.
Upvote valid corrections to help move entries into the corrections section.
Suggested correction: If you're using a poison it is always worth having an antidote nearby just in case something goes wrong.
Lao Che could still have the real antidote in his pocket and give a vial a fake antidote to Indy. Plus, if you're implying Lao Che would need the antidote should he accidentally be poisoned, it would also be a stupidity for him to give the antidote to Indy.
Lao Che's goal is not to kill Indy, it is to get the emperor's remains without having to give up the diamond. He even tries paying for the emperor outright with valuable coins. He brings the antidote in case he loses track of the poisoned glass and the wrong person is poisoned. He never intends to actually give the antidote to Indy, he's only using it as leverage so Indy will hand over the diamond without making a scene. Indy only gets the antidote after he kills Lao's henchman and the antidote is knocked off the table.
31st Oct 2017
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984)
Revealing mistake: When Indy is whipped six times, the first time we can see the whip doesn't touch him, or go anywhere near him.
27th Oct 2017
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984)
Continuity mistake: When Indy hangs the assassin on the fan, in one shot he's spinning, but in the very next shot he's not. He can't just instantly stop, he'd have to slow down.
22nd Oct 2017
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984)
Revealing mistake: When Indy wraps his whip around an assassin's neck and hangs him on the fan, we can see it's not actually around his neck, it's just attached to his clothing.
11th Oct 2017
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984)
Continuity mistake: When Indy punches Short Round, he starts falling forwards, but lands on his back.
10th Apr 2015
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984)
Continuity mistake: When the assassin's head is about to hit the fan, in the first shot of him going up, his head is very close to it, but in the next shot, it's further away.
16th Mar 2015
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984)
Question: When the man was hanged on the fan, what exactly happened? It seems like he was cut by the fan, but then there's no blood or anything. How exactly did he die? And why did the fan suddenly stop when he hit it?
Chosen answer: His neck was snapped by the whip getting caught in the fan. There isn't always blood with a hanging. Since the fan wasn't designed to hold a man's weight, the motor in it would have stopped or given out.
2nd Feb 2015
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984)
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.
Answer: It was never revealed in the film series what happened to him.
raywest ★