MovieChat Forums > Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984) Discussion > Do you hate Willie Scott more or Short R...

Do you hate Willie Scott more or Short Round


Yeah short round was cute when you were 9 or 10 years old watching it. But now he's become annoying. Granted Willie Scott is annoying. Which is worse? Short round for me. At least you can jacket to Kate Capeshaw

reply

Hang on wady we going for a wide

reply

Willie Scott. When I first saw this movie, I loved the fact that I could relate to it and the plot; however, Willie was just distracting all the way through. This movie appears to take place in Asia or with cultures centered around Asia and Short Round is Asian. So even if he was annoying, his physical look kind of blended him in.

THERE IS NOTHING TO FEAR. COLLEGE FOOTBALL IS HERE!!!

reply

It's a toss up for me. They both suck, in my opinion. I don't care how nice looking Willie is either...After a short while she's a pain in the ass. Based on that, they should have named her Short While....Together with Short Round they could conquer the I Jones universe in the most annoying ways possible.

reply

I hate Willie more but for me they could have both fallen out of the dinghy at the beginning.

reply

I typically abhor the token kid sidekick--and did even when I was a kid myself-- but Short Round has grown on me over the years. Jonathan Ke Quan is quite likeable in a role that could've grated in lesser hands. I'm not sad he's a one and done character, but I like him here.

But my feelings toward Willie have only grown colder. Kate Capshaw is a beautiful woman, and an actress I've liked in other roles, but her Willie Scott is the equivalent of someone screaming in your ear when you already have a bad headache.

reply

I love them both.

____________________
The story is king.

reply

I more so did not like Willie Scott.

Angus Young is a Brony

reply

I think they're both fun and funny. I like how they're goofy and Indy is the stalwart, unamused one. It's also very in the spirit of the adventure movies of the 30's and 40's, so it all works for me.

reply

I'd take the whimpy kid over the annoying slut every day.

Her voice still hunts me at night.

reply

Picture a series of movies about Willie Scott or Short Round, with Temple of Doom one of them.

Imagine Willie Scott is the protagonist of Willie Scott and the Temple of Doom, who by a twist of fate gets involved in a terrifying series of adventures and dangers that pretty much ruin her life and seem very likely to end it. She can blame Indian Jones for it without being too unfair, thinking that he kidnapped her and put her in constant danger and discomfort. It would not be too unfair for her to blame Indy for everything terrible or disgusting that happens to her. So if she thinks of Indy as her kidnapper falling for him by the end of the movie could be considered a type of Stockholm syndrome behavior.

So a protagonist who complains about their troubles to the one who sort of kidnapped them seems reasonable to me.

IMHO the audience is supposed to have two conflicting and yet simultaneous reactions to Willie Scott, to agree with Indy and Short Round's annoyance at her screaming and complaining and also to sympathize with her suffering.

Now consider Temple of Doom with Short Round as the protagonist and action hero, not too different from the actual movie. Shorty lived a normal life until his family was killed in a Japanese attack, and lived as a street orphan until he found a new home with Indy and Wu Han. Then Wu Han was killed and Shorty fled with Indy and a stranger into a series of one deadly danger after another, helping his friend Indy and the stranger Willie escape from each deadly peril.

I read a review that described Short Round as adorable. I didn't think that Short Round seemed adorable. Short Round seemed too busy yelling and screaming in terror and fighting to be adorable. But that is the fault of the villains who kept putting Shorty and others in deadly danger. When things were peaceful and quiet Shorty seemed like a nice enough kid.

reply