What's the Over/Under?

It's a column we've started on that other website...the website I've been seeing secretly on the side...But, I swear, it means nothing to me, okay? Nothing. It's just a column, nothing more.

Anyway, over at Cinegeeks, I started a column called Over/Under that's gaining some steam. The concept is simple: I choose a movie that's overrated. Preferably something that's beloved by a lot of people, so the article will piss them off and cause argument. At least 50% of the things I write on that site are designed to anger movie geeks. Not that I write things I don't agree with - I just select my own most radical, fringe opinions and run with them.

Then I choose another movie, something with some relation back to the original film, that I feel is underrated. So by pairing the two together, it's a good way to review two movies at once, and give people some perspective on where I'm coming from, film opinion wise.

For example, last week, I bashed the hell out of Garden State and recommended Buffalo '66 in its stead. The word was, some of the other Cinegeeks were not pleased by my choice of topic, but that's kind of the whole point of calling a movie "overrated," right? Too many people like it!

This week, I've tackled two Spielberg films. Overrated: Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade. Underrated: Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom.

I love Temple of Doom, probably a little bit more because everyone else seems to hate it. Even Steven Spielberg and George Lucas hate it now, bashing it incessantly on the DVD Special Features. The Beard basically says he wishes he could take the movie back and rework it, making it less scary, creepy and offensive and more family-friendly. What utter tripe.

He might as well just replace all the guns in E.T. with walkie-talkies and...oh, yeah, right...

My friend Sanjeev once told me the movie was offensive to Indian people. Maybe I'm an insensitive prick, but it doesn't seem that bad to me. Sure, it's stereotypical. It shows Indian culture as being, in some ways, a bit barbaric and primitive, even though great pains are taken to differentiate the murderous Thuggee cult with the good, noble Hindus who oppose it.

But a lot of movies stereotype international locales, including the first and third Indy movies, and no one accuses them of racism. Temple of Doom in many ways references the classic adventure film Gunga Din, which certainly does have racist elements in play. I'm not saying that it excuses Temple of Doom, but I am suggesting that the cartoonish exaggerations of some of the villains of the film are more a stylistic choice than an attack on the Hindu religion.

And as for the dinner party scene...hey, Asian cultural dishes contain a lot of animals Americans don't eat, and we kind of find that gross. It's not really so upsetting, is it?

I don't know...I tend to get in trouble here on the blog when I casually dismiss complaints of racism. I guess enough people are offended by Temple of Doom to make the point at least partially valid, so I'll concede it. But I certainly think the movie's defensible and entertaining as hell, far more lively and fun than the turgid and rote third installment, with Sean Connery as Indy's father proving the only real highlight.

To make this week's Over/Under feature doubly fascinating, the site's chief editor Ari wrote his own Spielberg-themed Over/Under. I greatly disagree with his thesis - that the underrated A.I. far outstrips the sci-fi/action masterpiece Minority Report - but check it out anyway, if only so you can leave snarky comments agreeing with my point of view in the comments section below.

Anyway, if you want to read more of this sort of blather, check out the article. And check out the whole site, as a matter of fact, cause it's cool and we're just starting out and need the traffic.