Director Debate No. 6: Steven Spielberg

bonerm

While I accept that many of his movies are slightly whimsical and broad, Steven Spielberg has been a master filmmaker for four decades now, directing and producing some most of the most successful and most loved movies of the past four decades.


Best Film: Schindler’s List. Evidence that Spielberg (who had to this point had mainly dealt with juvenile and fantastical material) his could deal with more mature subject matter. This movie is harrowing and poignant in equal measures and in my opinion will be the film he will be remembered for.

Worst Film: 1941. An overblown, ultra expensive ‘comedy’ that is short in laughs and is dragged down by the weight of its own production values. At the time Spielberg was on an unprecedented sequence of success and probably thought his golden touch could work with any material. He was wrong this time but to his credit learnt from it and chose to stay away from the broad comedy after this point.


Spielberg is a versatile master of nearly every genre, science fiction, thriller, action, war, historical drama, comedy (ok maybe not comedy genre but definitely comedic touches!). Just about the only genre that Spielberg hasn’t attempted is the musical and even that is not totally true if you consider the accomplished opening shots of Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. As well as directing Spielberg has also produced some of the biggest films in history over the past 40 years. His list of credits is as impressive as it is lengthy.


Further while many may conclude that he is merely a commercial director, I would respectfully disagree. It should not be dismissed that seven of his movies have been nominated for best picture, and that he himself has been nominated six times as best director (with two wins). Basically he is a man who has threaded the fine line between critical and commercial success and shown that he is equally adept in either environment.

Simon Adebisi

His worst film for me is The Terminal. Mawkish, sentimental bs.

But he has made so many masterpieces that whatever nonsense he makes in the future can be forgiven. Schindler's List is an excellent movie but its so grim and upsetting i could never consider it a favourite film. That would have to be Jaws for me. Its a perfect film. It has everything. Horror, action, tension, comedy & drama all tied together by fantastic acting and believable characters. And then the superb direction & cinematography just pushes it into fave film territory for me.

And the U.S.S. Indianapolis speech. Wow.

duckworth

Simon Adebisi wrote: »

Mawkish, sentimental bs.

This comment above about The Terminal sums up how I feel about almost the entire Spielberg catalogue. The only films I really enjoyed were Catch me If You Can and the early Indiana Jones films - light, frothy, witty and completely suited to Spielberg's style.

His other stuff epitomizes the worst of Hollywood movies to me - I find his films so boring and one dimensional. He seeks out sentimentality and emphasizes it - the complete opposite of what I think art should be about.

Of course, technically he is impressive - but films need a hell of a lot more than technical competence.

mike65

Hook must be his worst film or maybe Amistad or is it Always? Spielberg has made a fair % of thematiclly pretty low grade if technically well made films. He has shown himself to be at his best when at his most stripped down (a relative term when making a succession of big budget blockbusters I admit) - Jaws, Schindlers List, Sugerland Express, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Jurassic Park and thats why his greatest film in terms of thrills per dollar and minutes spent might be Duel. No distractions, no time to fiddle about on a 13 day TV movie shoot. I'd suggest he could a lot worse than work within those strictures again. It certainly worked for Hitchcock who in the 50s went on a run of increasingly elaborate expensive outings, they mainly worked of course but I suspect its not an accident that his last truely great film was also his cheapest and quickest since moving to Hollywood.

duckworth

Oooh, I forgot about Hook, which I loved as a kid, and probably still do. I think Spielberg works better in the children's realm.

Detour

Even after all these years, Jaws still remains one of my favorites. So suspenseful!

BopNiblets

He brought us the Indy (and inspiringly Indys dad!), the T-Rex, Omaha beach, Oscar Schindler, excellent director all around.

allanb49

I enjoyed hook and watched it recently enough as a kids movie it holds up quite well,

Best movie would be Jaws/Schindlers List/Jurassic Park

Worst i'd say well haven't seen 1941, but his worst which is really a term i can't use his least enjoyable on my part if War of the Worlds

ztoical

bonerm wrote: »

Best Film: Schindler’s List. Evidence that Spielberg (who had to this point had mainly dealt with juvenile and fantastical material) his could deal with more mature subject matter. This movie is harrowing and poignant in equal measures and in my opinion will be the film he will be remembered for.

Worst Film: 1941. An overblown, ultra expensive ‘comedy’ that is short in laughs and is dragged down by the weight of its own production values. At the time Spielberg was on an unprecedented sequence of success and probably thought his golden touch could work with any material. He was wrong this time but to his credit learnt from it and chose to stay away from the broad comedy after this point.

Have to say I hate Schindler's List and love 1941. I think Schindler's list while well made, is a very boring film based on a very boring book. The subject matter is very emotional but I've seen much better films take on the same subject matter and get a better emotional reponse. Life is Beautiful did in one scene

when the son goes to run around a corner and the dad grabs him and the walks away as the camera pulls back we get that one shot of the bodies

what I thought Schindler's list failed to do in it's whole 195 min running time and that was really capture both the emotion, horror and the humanity of the period. I made it through it in one sitting once when I first saw it in the cinema and have not managed to make it through it all in one sitting since. While I think Spielberg was mature enough to take on the subject matter from the technical side I don't think he was ever going to be ready to take on the subject matter from an emotional stand point something that I felt was re-enforced when Polanski brought out the Pianist.

Saying that I don't think it's his weakest film, I think that's Saving Private Ryan and will never understand what people see in it. The opening D day scenes reminded me of a british territorial army tv ad and after that it's just so cliche and boring. I disliked it even more because the Thin Red Line came out at the same time and was a hundred times better and Spielberg himself has done better with Empire of the Sun [which I think is his greatest film]

As for 1941 [which I rewatching right now ] I really enjoy it but that may come down to context in that I first remeber watching it with my parents when I was 4 when they were on a Belushi trip [saw the Blues Brothers that night as well] and it always makes me smile to watch it.

krudler

one of my favourite directors, pretty much crafted my childhood with stuff like E.T., Indy, Jurassic Park. And his ideas for movies are amazing, from The Goonies to Poltergeist and Back To The Future along with everything else he's co-produced or written.

Does he lay on the schmaltz? sure, the ending of War of the World was ruined by it when it wasnt needed in such a bleak film. but then when he does cold situations like Schindlers List and Munich you'd wonder why he doesnt let his darker side out more often.

He can block and shot like no other director as well, there are so many instantly recognisable frames from his movies, probably more than any other director in history. He pushes technology and effects that are rarely poor looking (the T-Rex still looks amazing, I wont hear a bad word said about it, and stuff like the opening of A.I. where the female robots head slides open is still astonishing looking.

He does suspense brilliantly as well, the basement invasion in WOTW being a great example. Movies would be a lot duller without him, thats for sure.

Mellor

bonerm wrote: »

Best Film: Schindler’s List. Evidence that Spielberg (who had to this point had mainly dealt with juvenile and fantastical material) his could deal with more mature subject matter.

The Colour Purple as exception

Hank_Jones

Very nice post, usually avoid these sort of threads as I feel people drone on as if they are writing essays for college.
You avoided this though and for that, I salute you.

I don't think you can really argue against Spielberg being a commercial director, as essentially, that is what he is.
The casting of his films are done so in order to get bums on seats and make money, regardless of how good his films actually are.

He is never going to go out and make arthouse films, his films are there to make money, simple as.
There may be a couple of exceptions to this, but otherwise no.

Ellian

ztoical wrote: »

Life is Beautiful did in one scene

when the son goes to run around a corner and the dad grabs him and the walks away as the camera pulls back we get that one shot of the bodies

what I thought Schindler's list failed to do in it's whole 195 min running time and that was really capture both the emotion, horror and the humanity of the period.

I know there is no right or wrong here only opinions but I would have to disagree.

In Schindler's List where the Jews are told to leave their luggage on the platform, and then it tracks into the collection room, where they are sorting through clothes, boots, all the photographs that were so important to individual families but are useless to the Nazis and no anonymous, to the jewelry and finally to the teeth. The look on the Jewish jewellers face said it all for me.

There is no argument from me that he can tend towards the mawkish and sentimental, but similarly you could argue that for example, Kubrick was penderous and clinical, or that Scorcese has just hammered the same thing over and over and over. All artists have good work and bad work - some of Shakespeare's early work is pretty dire - I personally hate large swathes of Turner for no immediately apparent reason. But I think Spielberg on his good days, is up there with the best there ever was.

ztoical

Ellian wrote: »

I know there is no right or wrong here only opinions but I would have to disagree.

In Schindler's List where the Jews are told to leave their luggage on the platform, and then it tracks into the collection room, where they are sorting through clothes, boots, all the photographs that were so important to individual families but are useless to the Nazis and no anonymous, to the jewelry and finally to the teeth. The look on the Jewish jewellers face said it all for me.

There is no argument from me that he can tend towards the mawkish and sentimental, but similarly you could argue that for example, Kubrick was penderous and clinical, or that Scorcese has just hammered the same thing over and over and over. All artists have good work and bad work - some of Shakespeare's early work is pretty dire - I personally hate large swathes of Turner for no immediately apparent reason. But I think Spielberg on his good days, is up there with the best there ever was.

I never said Spielberg wasn't one of the best I just don't think Schindler’s List is one of his best films...the scene you put forward as an example I've seen done in countless documentaries and at the end of the day it should be judged on it's merits as a film and while there are some strong technically elements the overall story I found moved far to slow and was to be frank boring....he had delt with powerful subject matter before this and in my opinion had delt with it better with films like Empire of the Sun [which I think is his best film and one of my favorite films from any director] and the Colour Purple and he seemed to get stuck between Schindler's List, Amastad and Saving Private Ryan. Amastad I found to be especially patronising.

Ellian

Fair enough. If it didn't work for you, it didn't work for you. But I thought it was an astoundingly great piece of cinema.

delbertgrady

In relative terms, based on how good the finished film is when you consider budget, resources, etc, Duel is phenomenal. Utterly compelling from start to finish, even if the ending is a bit unsatisfactory after all that's gone before.
Worst film is definitely AI:Artificial Intelligence. I wanted to strangle that kid. Kubrick's version would have been much more clinical, whereas that was an unconvincing, overlong, space age fairytale. Awful.

Nolanger

No mention of Sugarland express? Goldie Hawn gave the best performance in a Spielberg movie.

Sad Professor

I actually think A.I. is very underrated. There are a few problems due to the fact that Spielberg rushed the script, but they aren't the things that it is generally criticised for. Kubrick undoubtedly would have done it differently (and better), but I don't think people would have hated it any less.

johnny_ultimate

I like the design and look of AI for the most part, just think the sentimental ending jumps the shark a bit - and by a bit I mean on a rocket powered speedboat. It's one of those moments where a very imaginative film takes an absurd leap too far.

Catch Me If You Can is one Spielberg film recently I've really enjoyed. It's far from amazing, but it is what it is and very much succeeds within that criteria. It's jaunty, down-to-earth and fun - which is something a lot of recent Spielberg films have lacked. Minority Report is a good solid sci-fi actioner.

For the most part though, I think Jurassic Park is my favourite of his - perhaps one of the finest blockbusters ever made. Obviously all the Indy series (Crystal Skull largely excepted, barring a few moments of genuine good fun) and Jaws etc... are great, but Jurassic Park is just sublime. The goosebumps when the John Williams music kicks in and they first drive through the dinosaurs is truly one of the all time most memorable moments in cinema. His serious films are good and all (if not as good as some critics would have us believe IMO) but Spielberg the Entertainer is his most worthy input into Hollywood I think!

mike65

mike65 wrote: »

Hook must be his worst film or maybe Amistad or is it Always? Spielberg has made a fair % of thematiclly pretty low grade if technically well made films. He has shown himself to be at his best when at his most stripped down (a relative term when making a succession of big budget blockbusters I admit) - Jaws, Schindlers List, Sugerland Express, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Jurassic Park and thats why his greatest film in terms of thrills per dollar and minutes spent might be Duel. No distractions, no time to fiddle about on a 13 day TV movie shoot. I'd suggest he could a lot worse than work within those strictures again. It certainly worked for Hitchcock who in the 50s went on a run of increasingly elaborate expensive outings, they mainly worked of course but I suspect its not an accident that his last truely great film was also his cheapest and quickest since moving to Hollywood.

Nolanger wrote: »

No mention of Sugarland express? Goldie Hawn gave the best performance in a Spielberg movie.

Naturally I knew exactly nothing about it when I caught it on telly in 1978-79. Probably feels a bit "hippy" these days but twas compelling with some fine shoot 'em up car action. Always a good thing if you are 13/14 years old

missingtime

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

For the most part though, I think Jurassic Park is my favourite of his - perhaps one of the finest blockbusters ever made. Obviously all the Indy series (Crystal Skull largely excepted, barring a few moments of genuine good fun) and Jaws etc... are great, but Jurassic Park is just sublime. The goosebumps when the John Williams music kicks in and they first drive through the dinosaurs is truly one of the all time most memorable moments in cinema. His serious films are good and all (if not as good as some critics would have us believe IMO) but Spielberg the Entertainer is his most worthy input into Hollywood I think!

Everytime i hear Attenborough say "Dr. Grant, my dear Dr. Sattler. Welcome to Jurassic Park" and the camera pans to the shot of the dinosaurs, in packs, it transports me to the cinema and back to when I was a kid.

Such an awesome movie.

krudler

delbertgrady wrote: »

In relative terms, based on how good the finished film is when you consider budget, resources, etc, Duel is phenomenal. Utterly compelling from start to finish, even if the ending is a bit unsatisfactory after all that's gone before.
Worst film is definitely AI:Artificial Intelligence. I wanted to strangle that kid. Kubrick's version would have been much more clinical, whereas that was an unconvincing, overlong, space age fairytale. Awful.

Kubrick wrote the ending not Spielberg. Its also meant to be a fairytale, thats the entire point. It's basically Pinocchio with a robot.

I thought Haley Joel Osment gave a phenomenal performance as David, the fact he doesnt blink once in the entire film, even in long shots must have been a huge challenge as an actor.

krudler

missingtime wrote: »

Everytime i hear Attenborough say "Dr. Grant, my dear Dr. Sattler. Welcome to Jurassic Park" and the camera pans to the shot of the dinosaurs, in packs, it transports me to the cinema and back to when I was a kid.

Such an awesome movie.

"We have a T-Rex!" is a running joke between me and my housemate any time something major happens :pac:

opr

I would love to be able to go see Jurassic Park in the cinema.

Opr