DuracellEnergizer said:
I refuse to accept Temple of Doom as a prequel to Raiders of the Lost Ark.
Indy's clearly a committed religious skeptic prior to the ending of Raiders -- it makes little sense that he'd casually disregard the tales of the ark's power as "a lot of superstitious hocus pocus" if he'd encountered a bunch of magical glowing rocks and an evil priest who could rip hearts out of people without killing them only a year before.
Temple works far better as a sequel, and that is what I choose to accept it as.
Except for the date at the beginning of the film, there is nothing else that would make me ever believe it was a prequel. Everything about it seems like a sequel, including Harrison's more muscular physique (course his double had more work to do in this one than the others, so perhaps that's partly why it appears that way), the reference to the Arab swordsman when Indy reaches for his missing gun, his greater openness to the magic of the rocks than the powers of the Ark, the film's acknowledgement of Indy's fear of snakes when he nods at the snake statue, etc.
On the other hand, now that I say that, I should not fail to note that Indy seems a lot more selfish in this film, caring more about "fortune and glory" than about people, while in Raiders he clearly has a more noble head on his shoulders, so perhaps there is a sign of some maturity, but other than that, I really have a hard time looking at it as a prequel as well.