Steven Spielberg - classic or dud

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

over the course of a long career in film making, has this man proved himself to be one of the greatest film makers who ever lived, or a tired peddler of cheap sentimentality?

― DV (dirtyvicar), Wednesday, 27 July 2005 21:23 (7 years ago) Permalink

Little of both.

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Wednesday, 27 July 2005 21:51 (7 years ago) Permalink

classic who's done dud

― philmy, Wednesday, 27 July 2005 21:54 (7 years ago) Permalink

what eric said... the two are not mutually exclusive. see also griffith

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 27 July 2005 23:15 (7 years ago) Permalink

what eric said but he tends to be extremely dud when he is.

― jed_ (jed), Wednesday, 27 July 2005 23:18 (7 years ago) Permalink

example?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 27 July 2005 23:19 (7 years ago) Permalink

how much better would war of the worlds have been if you didn't see the alien until the end, when the tripod crashes and the alien flops out... but it's ET!! and they died not from bacteria but from homesickness!!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 27 July 2005 23:19 (7 years ago) Permalink

Mostly Dud. Jaws is fun. Raiders is great. Empire of the Sun is pretty good, but mostly ruined by Williams' oppressive score. Everything else is pretty much worthless. (tho I am curious about Duel).

― Shakey Mo Collier, Wednesday, 27 July 2005 23:21 (7 years ago) Permalink

I haven't seen his "Twilight Zone: The Movie" segment in a long time but I remember that being pretty good. Also there was one episode of "Amazing Stories" that I really liked.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Wednesday, 27 July 2005 23:23 (7 years ago) Permalink

tonight i was having dinner with some relatives i haven't seen in a while and i mentioned i was going to minor in film studies and one of them said, "oh, are you going to be the next STEVEN SPIELBERG?"

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Thursday, 28 July 2005 02:46 (7 years ago) Permalink

i think i might like "close encounters" more than any truffaut film.

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Thursday, 28 July 2005 02:55 (7 years ago) Permalink

Spielberg has two issues: the need for deep, moral messages and a perpetual underestimating of his audience. This translates to about twenty minutes of movie time we don't need. Families return to go hug Schindler and cry. Tom Cruise's character gets saved from the deep freeze in Minority Report so he can exact his revenge. He's usually better when he's being schlocky, Jurassic Park aside. I still think he did some of his best work with Gremlins and Gremlins 2.

― mike h. (mike h.), Thursday, 28 July 2005 03:13 (7 years ago) Permalink

Dud. I love the Indiana Jones trilogy (the latter two more as childhood memories than for the films themselves), Jurassic Park was one of the last good blockbusters, the first part of Saving Private Ryan is still riveting. Other than that, I'll go with cheap peddler of middlebrow twaddle.

The Terminal stripped him of any claim to classicness.

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Thursday, 28 July 2005 03:14 (7 years ago) Permalink

Not that he directed those, but that he was involved. Yeah, Gremlins.

― mike h. (mike h.), Thursday, 28 July 2005 03:14 (7 years ago) Permalink

if producing counts, then Band of Brothers almost redeems the bullshit that was The Terminal.

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Thursday, 28 July 2005 03:19 (7 years ago) Permalink

Steven Spielberg - meh.

It's one thing to get excited in a 'film school' sort of way about his technique. It's another thing to sit in a dark theater and be moderately entertained by his movies. But has Speilberg overcome the limits of his medium to create great and lasting art in the way of Cocteau or Fellini or Howard Hawks or Preston Sturges? Not in my view. He generally makes clever confections. He's a great chef.

However, his depiction of the D-Day landing in Saving Private Ryan is a classic that stands head and shoulders above his normal work, including the remainder of SPR.

― Aimless (Aimless), Thursday, 28 July 2005 03:22 (7 years ago) Permalink

i knew it was only a matter of time before someone had to make the distinction between mere "entertainment" and "great and lasting art."

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Thursday, 28 July 2005 03:26 (7 years ago) Permalink

did anyone else enjoy Catch Me If You Can? overrated, but once you lay the hype aside it's a fun bit o fluff. Tom Hanks entertainingly stiff and starchy, well-plotted, etc. most of Sbergs other movies i can't stand, but that one gets a pass from me.

― yuengling participle (rotten03), Thursday, 28 July 2005 03:31 (7 years ago) Permalink

Lemme see if I can make this a bit clearer on the "lasting art" business.

Take, for example,Brininging Up Baby. It aims at nothing more than sheer entertainment, but it is so entertaining that it sheerly delights me with its artistry and wit, its little-red-wagon sense of fun. It is an exemplar of light-hearted foolery, a gush of google-eyed silliness, a whole 'nother world you step into.

E.T. - The Extra Terrestrial aims at something a bit more than 'mere' entertainment. It wants to achieve a certain modicum of significance, in a warm and fuzzy sort of way - as a statement about wonder and innocence or something like that. But it doesn't really work on that level. It achieves a sappy, happy sentimentality about wonder and innocence. You cry when ET is dying at the hands of the mean, cold-hearted scientists because, um, never mind why. But can you take any part of it back into your life and make it work for you.

That's why Spielberg is meh. He's a perfect B+ student. He gets all the low-hanging fruit and most of the middling stuff, but never quite bags the topmost stuff.

― Aimless (Aimless), Thursday, 28 July 2005 03:46 (7 years ago) Permalink

That's a workable theory, but doesn't take into account some of Spielberg's fantastic second-gear movies that I don't see aiming for anything much other than 'mere' entertainment... other than to question why the prefix 'mere'... stuff like Temple of Doom, certain showcase scenes in the two Jurassic Parks and, yeah, War of the Worlds.

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Thursday, 28 July 2005 04:30 (7 years ago) Permalink

On balance, classic. Especially for Jaws, ET, Raiders, Schindler and Close Encounters.

He may be pretty middlebrow, but stuff like Minority Report, Catch Me If You Can, WOTW etc is very entertaining, well made cinema. I agree that he often feels like he's trying to make a bigger statement than he actually achieves, but I cannot think of another director working currently who has consistently entertained me so well over the last 25 years.

No mention of it yet here, but I'm on the side that feels A.I. is one of his best films, too. There's plenty not to like about it, but the stuff that works (the whole opening act, the journey to drowned Manhattan, fuck it, even the ending) is some of the most mesmerising, compelling sci-fi I have ever seen. Real cinema of wonder in a very pure form.

― Bill A (Bill A), Thursday, 28 July 2005 08:58 (7 years ago) Permalink

how did howard hawks 'overcome the limits of his medium to create great and lasting art'? he's about the most bog-standard shot-reverse shot directors in the history of film. great fun, but, come on, 'overcoming the limits of the medium'? all you've said is that 'bringing up baby' has teh robbles.

― N_RQ, Thursday, 28 July 2005 09:13 (7 years ago) Permalink

i can think of like ten howard hawks films that qualify as "great art" if anything does. meh to anyone who thinks he's not great cos he doesn't do those BIG IMPRESSIVE CAMERA MOVES (though sometimes he did).

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Thursday, 28 July 2005 09:26 (7 years ago) Permalink

funny i was thinking about just this lying in bed this morning. I recon War of the worlds was great. I found it really frightening at times, I wouldnt bother with it on DVD but in the cinema it was genuinly gripping.
He has always been flagged as an auteur the creator of modern blockbusters etc etc, i think the truth is that he is a director for hire, who makes a few personal projects, and a lot of projects personal.
Amoung my faves are empire of the sun, Jaws, 1941, gremlins 2 and it has to be said, catch me if you can.
so classic, though minority report and ai both sucked ass, as does close encounters, so much build up for so little pay off.

― lukey (Lukey G), Thursday, 28 July 2005 09:31 (7 years ago) Permalink

it's not just about that (although, you know, it's nice to have more than the two-shot, the close-up, the master -- nice also to have expressive editing JUST OCNE IN A WHILE). i don't care if he's "great art" (blah jargon) or not; it's just he isn't all that interesting. there are more interesting directors. like spielberg!!! they both have a somewhat limited and audience-minded view of 'human nature', praps.

― N_RQ, Thursday, 28 July 2005 09:33 (7 years ago) Permalink

I'm with NRQ here.

― Sick Mouthy (Nick Southall), Thursday, 28 July 2005 09:50 (7 years ago) Permalink

i'm gonna have to restrain myself from writing an entire essay here, but suffice to say i think hawks is one of the five greatest directors ever and i can't even begin to say why his best films transcend "expressive editing" and all that film school bullshit. this is verging on "the ramones aren't as interesting as frank zappa" territory. and i hope no one thinks i'm being a boring old film rockist because hawks is like the most ENTERTAINING great director who ever lived. and i don't think your last sentence shows much (or any) understanding of his attitude toward his audience.

i actually LIKE spielberg and feel he gets a bad rap from "entertainment is not art" types, but howard hawks is a greater director than spielberg for the same reason charles schulz is a greater artist than dave sim.

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Thursday, 28 July 2005 10:15 (7 years ago) Permalink

haha when ppl ask me tomorrow why i look so sleepy i'll have to say "cos i was up at 4 a.m. being the film geek version of that guy who throws a fit because you think picard is better than kirk."

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Thursday, 28 July 2005 10:16 (7 years ago) Permalink

and i hope no one thinks i'm being a boring old film rockist because hawks is like the most ENTERTAINING great director who ever lived.

i. dis. agree. there, that wasn't so hard. in this context, i don't care about great directors. i care about entertaining films. hawks' films are *quite* entertaining. but they don't stand out particularly from hollywood films of the 'classic' (c. 1930 - c. 1960) period.

he has a slightly nasty, right-libertarian view of society based on the rugged-individualist/masculinist ideal (women have to be men). it's this glib view of 'how to deal' that i mean by 'audience-minded'. he's all about winners.

expressive editing (blah phrase, but whatevs) is not film school bullshit. following the aesthetic choices of 1950s cahiers du cinema is film school bullshit!!

― N_RQ, Thursday, 28 July 2005 10:25 (7 years ago) Permalink

when did great exciting crowd-pleasing moviemaking become "film school bullshit"?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 13:24 (7 years ago) Permalink

if indy running from the rock is now considered some abstract academic film-school braininess then i don't even know what we're talking about anymore

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 13:25 (7 years ago) Permalink

i think jd thought that what i meant [that was fun] by expressive editing and non-shot-reverse-shot moviemaking was, i dunno, something hyper-intellectual -- resnais, or whatever. i love resnais, but i *also* meant modern movies LIKE 'SAVING PRIVATE RYAN'. i have my qualms but as movie art there's a shitload more to chew on in 'SPR' than there is in anything by hawks.

― N_RQ, Thursday, 28 July 2005 13:30 (7 years ago) Permalink

i'm gonna refuse to take sides on this one

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 13:33 (7 years ago) Permalink

would the oft-overlooked michael curtiz be a better predecessor comparison?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 13:34 (7 years ago) Permalink

no-one has seen all of curtiz's movies. he made 100s. there's no pressing reason to separate his stuff from hawks' or from thatera of hollywood in general: more unites 'to have and have not' and 'casablanca' than, oh i dunno, two curtiz films i've forgotten the names of. it doesn't belittle classic genre films to say that the differences between them are not particularly big -- in the context of the history of film as a whole.

point is the kind of stuff spielberg does, like the beach scene, was beyond the dreams of any classic hollywood director. they'd have fucking killed to have done it. maybe sam fuller with spielberg's crew would be the best thing.

― N_RQ, Thursday, 28 July 2005 13:41 (7 years ago) Permalink

Hitchcock was also "middlebrow" (which seems to be the label for a great image-maker who also entertains a mass audience). Not that Spielberg has ever achieved the consistency of Hitch from 1954-64, but his films (esp post-Jurassic) generally show more complexity and disturbingly adult themes than directors who are taken more seriously (cf Spike Lee, Soderbergh, Coens).

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 28 July 2005 13:46 (7 years ago) Permalink

Here are some movies I have not seen and don't have any real intention of seeing.

# Indiana Jones 4 (2006) (announced)
# Untitled Steven Spielberg/Abraham Lincoln Project (2007) (pre-production)
# Untitled 1972 Munich Olympics Project (2005) (filming)
# War of the Worlds (2005)
# The Terminal (2004)
# Catch Me If You Can (2002)
# Minority Report (2002)
# Artificial Intelligence: AI (2001)

This list, of films I have seen, arranged more or less in descending order of quality (last = best) is the reason why I'm not interested in any of the films above:

# Saving Private Ryan (1998)
# The Lost World: Jurassic Park (1997)
# Schindler's List (1993)
# Jurassic Park (1993)
# Hook (1991)
# Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989)
# Empire of the Sun (1987)
# The Color Purple (1985)
# Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984)
# E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial (1982)
# Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)
# Jaws (1975)
# Duel (1971)

In conclusion, Thank You Mr. Spielberg for bringing some really fantastic adventures to the big screen, and showing us some highly exciting moments, No Thank You Mr. Spielberg for saddling nearly all of them with increasingly awful casting as time marches on and for trying to choke us to death with your faith in the human spirit or whatever you want to call that unbelievably smug annoying self-congratulatory horseshit.

xpost,
more complexity and disturbingly adult themes
So do the fucking Matrix movies. OMG HE DIES TO SAVE EVERYBODY

― TOMBOT, Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:22 (7 years ago) Permalink

Such soul-crushing cynicism deserves, oh, Michael Bay.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:30 (7 years ago) Permalink

"unbelievably smug annoying self-congratulatory horseshit"

this is kinda otm -- it's there in the movies -- but the horseshit bits are outnumbered by the highly exciting moments. or, they're *both* there. same way fall-flat bits of unfunniness and misanthropy coexist with real chills in hitchcock.

otoh, is 'saving private ryan' really that smug? it has those terrible bookends, and the matt damon bits are really annoying, but i've seen far less convinving movies about war.

― N_RQ, Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:34 (7 years ago) Permalink

Spielberg has always been very good at provoking a visceral reaction using whatever crap he has available. He knows how to make ostensibly exciting movies. Unfortunately, since you know that all of his ostensibly exciting movies will be ending in some fashion that makes you feel like a baby chickadee just regurgitated golden liquid cuddles of redemption directly into your stomach, the thrill isn't there, because you're just waiting for the hammer to fall and get the brainwashing over with.

The first time I saw Duel I knew it was supposed to be "atypical" Spielberg but I still spent probably half the movie waiting for some insipid deus ex machina to rob me of all my actual emotions and replace them with spoonfed lotus blooms. This is what he's done to his legacy.

― TOMBOT, Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:34 (7 years ago) Permalink

into the west was awesome - rachel leigh cook!!

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:36 (7 years ago) Permalink

i helped my friend videotape an audition for into the west! he didn't get the part though :(

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:38 (7 years ago) Permalink

I am the only person in the world who thinks Jaws is a shitty, shitty movie. I don't entirely blame Spielberg because the book it's based on is even worse than the film, so in that respect, he did well.

Looking at that list above I realize I've disliked a LOT of his movies, without even really realizing they were Spielberg flix. I mean the only movies that I like in that list are Raiders, Last Crusade, Duel, Catch Me If You Can (and that's not even an active like because I forgot I saw it until recently) and...uh...well, I don't actually like Jurassic Park at ALL but Jeff Goldblum dresses fantastically in it so I'll give it a little bit of a pass (THAT FINAL SHOT OF THE T-REX AND THE RAPTORS IS THE ABSOLUTE WORST SHOT IN THE ENTIRE HISTORY OF CINEMATOGRAPHY AND DIRECTION AND THAT IS A STONE COLD FACT PEOPLE). I'd like Saving Private Ryan better if the bookends were deleted and it was about a half hour shorter.

Dr. Morbius, how about you discuss the "disturbing adult themes" in, say, Catch Me If You Can?

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:38 (7 years ago) Permalink

He's okay. I thought Minority Report was pretty decent, up until the ending, anyway.

― Leon C. (Ex Leon), Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:39 (7 years ago) Permalink

anyway, i gotta agree with everyone praising band of brothers on this thread, i really liked it so much more than i expected (and overall a lot more than saving private ryan).

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:39 (7 years ago) Permalink

Dud. Fuck him. I am Filmist.

― Anti-Pope Consortium (noodle vague), Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:40 (7 years ago) Permalink

Ok the more I'm thinking about that final shot of the T-Rex and the Raptors in the lobby with the fucking banner floating in front of them in Jurassic Park the more angry I'm getting. Goddamn hack.

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:42 (7 years ago) Permalink

minority report had a pretty good first third/half, i guess, but boy does it ever go to shit. and it's about as dark and adult as an episode of young indiana jones

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:42 (7 years ago) Permalink

catch me if you can woulda been alot more disturbing/adult/fun if it'd kept true to frank abagnale's motivation in the book (pussy).

jaws fucking rules ally. jpark3's pretty great, the best of the bunch no doubt. poltergeist was pretty great. band of brothers was incredible. into the west was rousing fun.

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:44 (7 years ago) Permalink

catch me would've been better if it had been about 30 mins shorter

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:44 (7 years ago) Permalink

WAIT WAIT I ALSO LIKE EMPIRE OF THE SUN.

Jaws does NOT fucking rule!

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:45 (7 years ago) Permalink

i think jpark3 is rett bratner or someone...

― N_RQ, Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:46 (7 years ago) Permalink

it's jumanji guy... joe johnston

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:47 (7 years ago) Permalink

nrq makes a really good point: that maybe spielberg is - deliberately? that wd be so cool - sacrificing good UNIFIED WORKS for the opportunity to make astonishing scenes or moments

UNIFIED WORKS suck anyway

ie his refusal to end his recent movies unyuckily is the price he is prepared to pay for the chance to shoot [x] idea

i don't buy this really, but i wd admire SS lots if i discovered this is where he's secretly at

― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:47 (7 years ago) Permalink

war of the worlds woulda been alot better if richard dreyfuss had come out of the ship at the end.

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:47 (7 years ago) Permalink

or if it had turned out it was the nazis!

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:48 (7 years ago) Permalink

allyzay i have seen lisztomania and yr hyperbole impresses me none

― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:48 (7 years ago) Permalink

jaws rules

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:49 (7 years ago) Permalink

from up-coming director's cut

― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:51 (7 years ago) Permalink

free frisky

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:52 (7 years ago) Permalink

i don't buy this really, but i wd admire SS lots if i discovered this is where he's secretly at

oh, begone intentionality! i think most movies are compendia of bits with lots of redundancies put in to keep front office happy. it's always been like that(?). spielberg is a total enigma as a man -- i have read a biography of him and know NOTHING about him.

but cutting through or ignoring the 'greatest generation' blah i've been impressed by the action scenes in the saving private ryan/band of brothers projects.

as with albums, ignore the rubbish bits.

― N_RQ, Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:53 (7 years ago) Permalink

bbbbbbbut what if Richard Dreyfuss was the Nazis?????!

My hyperbole is totally correct, watch JP again and wait for it...that final shot of the freaking T-Rex. Claymation dinosaur, why you ruin shot all the time? I would've liked Jurassic Park better if there was no dinosaurs, but instead Richard Dreyfuss and Roy Scheider.

Anyway I am still interested in finding out how Spielberg classics like Catch Me If You Can or The Terminal or The Lost World explore more disturbing, dark, and adult themes than Bamboozled and are more complex than The Big Lebowski! I'll give Morbius Soderberg.

XPOST ARGH STOP IT WITH THOSE MORPHED ANIMALS

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:53 (7 years ago) Permalink

Film school types have a different measuring stick than an ordinary film viewer like me. Speilberg is probably the quinessential film school success story, the Lord of the Film School Graduates, the wet dream of budding director-wannabes. He's filthy rich, can command any script he pleases, casts A-list actors at will, and has all Hollywood groveling before him. He's a One Phone Call kind of guy.

Does this make him classic, or just Darryl Zanuck reborn?

I stick with my B+ assessement. He has good chops, and a consistent record. I like him OK, but nothing he makes excites me much.

― Aimless (Aimless), Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:54 (7 years ago) Permalink

'lost world' is about the amoral exploitation of scientific research for profit -- it's an adult theme. treatment another matter.

aimless -- steve is hurt, but he will try to improve his record for next semester.

― N_RQ, Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:57 (7 years ago) Permalink

i don't give a penny fig for intentionality nrq, it is a phantom of goofy wackness, i wd still admire SS if this is where he was at!! it wd just be kinda cool given everything, if he too thought john williams wz an gharstly hack but WHAT THE HELL, at least with him on board i get to do x y and z

― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:57 (7 years ago) Permalink

well the treatment and exploration of these adult themes would seem to be the key here.

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:58 (7 years ago) Permalink

jpark1 wasn't all that but people were just so damn happy to finally get to see a real live dinosaur.

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:59 (7 years ago) Permalink

wow you musta sawn i difft version to me blount

― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:00 (7 years ago) Permalink

what's your point here exactly? that people in film school like him because he's successful? wtf does that have to do with anything

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:01 (7 years ago) Permalink

claymation dinosaurs

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:01 (7 years ago) Permalink

when i finally saw jurassic park 2 i was amazed at how bad and UN-masterful it was actually

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:01 (7 years ago) Permalink

(hmmm i am leavin the surface of planet english i think --- brisk walk off to robster's bday for me)

― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:02 (7 years ago) Permalink

give him our best mark

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:04 (7 years ago) Permalink

will do! i am sure this will be settled when i am next online

― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:04 (7 years ago) Permalink

Bamboozled is a decent sketch til it peters out when it wants us to take 2-D charcters seriously. (I like 25th Hour) The Big Lebowski is another half-amusing, mostly empty rip on old movies (yuck on pointless Kate Hepburn impression).

>how about you discuss the "disturbing adult themes" in, say, Catch Me If You Can?<

No, not a classic. Quite a decent Missing/Inadequate Dad Complex meditation (major Spielberg motif), tho, with both Leo and Walken putting in unusually deep performances before returning to check-cashing roles.

The Terminal: America as Last Best Melting Pot AND Dubya's Fortress ("America is closed").

JP2 was the last of his I skipped.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:04 (7 years ago) Permalink

Are you, like, actually serious with all of your posts on these film threads or are you like "doing a Momus"?

I think Walken's performance in Catch Me If You Can is completely immemorable, as immemorable as he gets, at least. Also, I'm not sure how I understand in what way Savion Glover's character in Bamboozled is any more of a "2-D sketch" than Leonardo DiCaprio's character here (note: this does not imply that DiCaprio's character IS a "2-D sketch"). And yes, the 25th Hour beats the crap out of both of these movies, and anything Spielberg's done in, oh, 10 or 15 years. I was keeping off the sucka punches on the "Spielberg more provocative than Lee" comment but if you wanna kick yourself in a metaphorical discussion-genitals go ahead!

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:15 (7 years ago) Permalink

what's your point here exactly? that people in film school like him because he's successful?

Not quite. Film schoolies love him because he is the archetypal film school product. Speilberg sat through all the same classes, learned all the same rigamarole as them and then he went out and became the Nu Robot Overlord of films. It sprinkles fairy dust (read: imagined money & power) over the whole film school experience.

― Aimless (Aimless), Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:16 (7 years ago) Permalink

as to the best of my knowledge, nobody on this thread is a "film schoolie," so i'm still not sure what your point is

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:20 (7 years ago) Permalink

also i doubt ET made $435 million purely on the virture of spielberg setting a good example for "film schoolies"

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:21 (7 years ago) Permalink

Spielberg hasn't ended a movie well in 20 years. In fact, he's the godfather of SHITTY, UNFUCKINGWATCHABLE endings.

― don weiner (don weiner), Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:30 (7 years ago) Permalink

"Spielberg more provocative than Lee"

Never said that. But Lee can't really fake provocation regularly anymore. Cine-hipsters turn to City of God, Y Tu Mama Tambien etc for that pose now.

Yeah, Walken's much more memorable sleepwalking through gangster and vampire roles, or SNL. Hey, he recites lines off the expected beats!

I was quite moved by the ending of The Terminal and chilled by A.I.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:35 (7 years ago) Permalink

i doubt ET made $435 million purely...

By the same token Arnold Schwarzenegger didn't make $250 million as an actor by being chopped liver, either. Although it is rather hard to pin down exactly what his talent was. Your point being?

― Aimless (Aimless), Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:36 (7 years ago) Permalink

jurassic park is probly my fav spielberg after last crusade, i dunno how much is direction and how much is great great great great great performances from everybody in it- neill, goldblum (as usual), dern (or 'tyrannysaurus sex' according to waynes world), old dude, bulimic girl from angus, newmann from seinfeld, even that weird cartoon of sam jackson ('hold onto your butts!'), i never ever get tired of it. jurassic park 2 was really surprisingly good the 1st time i saw it but does not stand up too much after that, it wastes vince vaughn and julianne moore and really goldblum too, but its still got that weird t rex hunter dudes and the cliff hanger with the trailer HANGING OVER A CLIFF which i still think is one of the great pieces of modern action movies on par w/ anything from die hard or whatever

― 3, Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:39 (7 years ago) Permalink

and yeah producing gremlins 2 is enough to give him a pass for 700 million shitty spielberg movies

― 3, Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:45 (7 years ago) Permalink

I remember when it was pretty funny that Vince Vaughn went from second banana in indie Doug Liman film to BLAMMO! Jurassic Park sequel.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:46 (7 years ago) Permalink

ohh hook is really good too! theres some funny shit in that movie!!

― 3, Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:46 (7 years ago) Permalink

xpost yeah i know they waste him completely tho, hes got a couple one liners but you dont even get a backstory or any of that, hes just like this weird extra

― 3, Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:46 (7 years ago) Permalink

I dare Dr Morbius to say something without sarcastically deriding the intelligence and/or sincerity of everyone who disagrees with him in a manner suggestive of a shut-in 20-y.o.

― TOMBOT, Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:47 (7 years ago) Permalink

another thing about jurassic park 2 is that it stars not just maude lebowski but also KARL HUNGUS!!! and he gets eaten by lil dinosaurs!! 'vee dont care! vee still wants zee money lebowski or vee fucks you up!!!!' spielberg likes him obv cuz he was in minority report too

― 4, Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:51 (7 years ago) Permalink

i dare you to ignore him!

― 4, Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:51 (7 years ago) Permalink

minority report was pretty bad but he gets love for weird bald samantha morton

― 3, Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:58 (7 years ago) Permalink

"Three years before production began, Steven Spielberg assembled a team of sixteen future experts in Santa Monica to brainstorm out the year 2054 for him. This team included Neil Gershenfeld, professor at the Media Lab at MIT; Shaun Jones, director of biomedical research at DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency); William Mitchell, dean of the school of architecture at MIT; Peter Calthorpe, the New Urbanism evangelist; Jaron Lanier, one of the inventors of virtual reality technology; Douglas Coupland, author and commentator; Stewart Brand, author, scientist and co-creator of The Well online community; Kevin Kelly, founder of Wired Magazine; 'Harald Belker', car designer; and 'John Underkoffler', the science and technology advisor for the movie."

and it STILL looked fake

― 3, Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:00 (7 years ago) Permalink

I'd suggest the criticisms of the anti-Spielberg crowd sound a lot like the complaints of haters of Paul McCartney. So regardless of how you respond to their aesthetics, accept that they're pop giants and NEXT!...

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:01 (7 years ago) Permalink

Douglas Coupland!! haha. that guy's a terrible writer. doubt he knows all that much about the "the future" either.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:04 (7 years ago) Permalink

i wonder if he predicted the current state of him not selling any books

― 6, Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:08 (7 years ago) Permalink

I agree with whoever said upthread that one should treat an uneven Spielberg movie as one would treat a rubbish album: criticize the bad parts, then ignore them, and concentrate on the good ones.

― Alfred Soto (Alfred Soto), Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:11 (7 years ago) Permalink

i read that all the "futurists" were pissed off because spielberg ignored them and just did what he wanted to anyway!!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:16 (7 years ago) Permalink

(like storing data in big plates of glass)

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:17 (7 years ago) Permalink

I liked that though, even though it's completely fake.

― Leon C. (Ex Leon), Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:18 (7 years ago) Permalink

it makes no sense

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:18 (7 years ago) Permalink

'Futurists' have usually been wrong, yes? Concept of 'fake' in sci-fi, dicey.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:20 (7 years ago) Permalink

i love all the future movies where its still close enough to now so shit is not all bladerunnered out and it just looks like a rich white ppl suburb w/ cooler appliances (the 6th day, back to the future 2, etc)

― 3, Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:22 (7 years ago) Permalink

minority report definitely TRIED to do that, i kinda liked that he didn't just replace all the buildings with future-buildings. there's some scene in a residential neighbourhood that looks like a neighbourhood circa now...

the worst is futurizing stuff that doesn't make any sense, like in AI... in the future cars will only need THREE wheels!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:24 (7 years ago) Permalink

haha what about demolition man where the cars have PLASTIC PANELS OVER THE WHEELS SO YOU CAN ONLY SEE THE BOTTOM!!!!! 'our plastic car panel technology has advanced light years beyond yours!'

― 3, Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:26 (7 years ago) Permalink

I can't abide any harsh criticisms of Bladerunner, particularly its set/scenery design! wtf

have you seen the LA refinery lately? that IS Bladerunner.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:27 (7 years ago) Permalink

my uncle's friend's son wrote demolition man!! apparently he made out well, as i've heard at many many family gatherings

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:27 (7 years ago) Permalink

'hey slocki, long time no see! you tried the potato salad?'

― 3, Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:31 (7 years ago) Permalink

didn't demolition man take place in a future dominated by taco bells?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:32 (7 years ago) Permalink

can we do fake spielberg?

1. dude who did joe vs the volcano
2. dude who did disney's the kid

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:34 (7 years ago) Permalink

3. shyamalan

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:34 (7 years ago) Permalink

yeah like i said, realistic!! look heres dude w/ slick rick-

― 3, Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:35 (7 years ago) Permalink

man i love joe vs the volcano!

― 3, Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:35 (7 years ago) Permalink

I was keeping off the sucka punches on the "Spielberg more provocative than Lee" comment but if you wanna kick yourself in a metaphorical discussion-genitals go ahead!

I dunno. Seems like most Spielberg movies lately generate a lot more heated discussion (even if a massive chunk of the chatter comes from the usual suspects, the "spielberg/lucas killed the '70s renaissance, et al" folk) than anything Lee's put out, which are either given surprising auld lang syne (25th Hour) or ignored outright (nearly everything else in the last decade).

Big Lebowski might be the Coens' best movie, but I don't see it being their most complex or, more to it, having even a fraction of the complexity/contradiction of A.I.

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:36 (7 years ago) Permalink

the worst is futurizing stuff that doesn't make any sense, like in AI... in the future cars will only need THREE wheels!

Fritz Lang did a lot of stupid stuff too. Doesn't change the fact that he's among the three or five best directors ever.

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:37 (7 years ago) Permalink

when will people realize that big lebowski really isn't all that

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:38 (7 years ago) Permalink

bamboozled was ignored?

― 3, Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:38 (7 years ago) Permalink

anyway complexity & contradiction are not inherently good traits! the mechanics of the holocaust were complex and contradctory!!

― 3, Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:39 (7 years ago) Permalink

lebowski is still really, really funny

― 6, Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:39 (7 years ago) Permalink

so is fargo!

― 6, Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:39 (7 years ago) Permalink

I bet this thread could go on for 2000 posts before ppl would discuss "Amistad" since it doesn't fit their idea of 'typical Spielberg' re milieu or themes.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:40 (7 years ago) Permalink

or maybe because nobody saw it

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:42 (7 years ago) Permalink

it was aight

― 3, Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:42 (7 years ago) Permalink

I didn't see it. White man makes movie about slavery = me not being interested.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:45 (7 years ago) Permalink

you are an idiot

― 5, Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:46 (7 years ago) Permalink

(altho thankfully he didn't - to my knowledge - cast any white guys in lead roles as redeemers, saviors, etc. See "Mississippi Burning" and pretty much every other Hollywood film about black people and/or civil rights movement, slavery, etc.)

x-post

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:47 (7 years ago) Permalink

Well, I didn't say that Lebowski was all that, just that it was probably the Coens' best film.

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:47 (7 years ago) Permalink

you think? i dunno, i think it's got too much totally weak shit in it to really qualify as best...

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:51 (7 years ago) Permalink

I think Lebowski is funny, but honestly I have more trouble sitting through that than any of their previous films. I think their best is actually Hudsucker Proxy. Or Miller's Crossing. Gay gangster subtext pwnz.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:53 (7 years ago) Permalink

my favorite Coen film is O Brother Where Art Thou? but maybe i'm just nuts

― gear (gear), Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:53 (7 years ago) Permalink

honestly for me lebowski was their last gasp, everything after it i totally fucking hate

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:54 (7 years ago) Permalink

I could only bring myself to see The Man Who Wasn't There and fuck all those film school kids who crowed about it, that was some dull, bad shit.

― gear (gear), Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:56 (7 years ago) Permalink

so bad!! more like the MOVIE that wasn't there right right?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:57 (7 years ago) Permalink

are "film school kids" supposed to be the corny indie fux of movie fandom or something??

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:58 (7 years ago) Permalink

"honestly for me lebowski was their last gasp, everything after it i totally fucking hate "

OTM. its been pretty much drivel ever since. tho O Brother has its moments (I enjoy Clooney's Clark Gable impression)

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:59 (7 years ago) Permalink

I have decided that when Aimless or Gear refer to "film school kids" they are talking about Shakey Mo and Morbius, since those are the people on this thread I would most like to see referred to derisively. Semantics in the eye of the reader.

― TOMBOT, Thursday, 28 July 2005 17:00 (7 years ago) Permalink

I know this film school kid whose oft-recited top ten reads like the most predictable canon ever assembled. "Godfather, Taxi Driver, Searchers, Vertigo blah blah blah..."

the only good bit about TMWWT was Tony Shaloub.

― gear (gear), Thursday, 28 July 2005 17:01 (7 years ago) Permalink

only thing I hate more than informed film snobs are uninformed ones, who shall never deviate from the AFI lists or Tarantino/Kevin Smith films!

― gear (gear), Thursday, 28 July 2005 17:03 (7 years ago) Permalink

i.e. most everyone I went to film school with (though admittedly they might be even worse, as I recall one time before class when everyone gushed about how awesome Clay Pigeons was)

― gear (gear), Thursday, 28 July 2005 17:04 (7 years ago) Permalink

can we turn this into a tony shaloub thread

― 3, Thursday, 28 July 2005 17:06 (7 years ago) Permalink

I have to admit when I walked into a coworker's friend's basement home theater room and he demonstrated his $4000 setup for us with Blade, referring to it unironically as the greatest film of all time, I probably overestimated his personality and strength of character.

― TOMBOT, Thursday, 28 July 2005 17:10 (7 years ago) Permalink

I own the Blade DVD but it remains unopened, out of fear that I will diminish its trade-in value. I might keep Blade II though.

― gear (gear), Thursday, 28 July 2005 17:12 (7 years ago) Permalink

blade is good! stop hating everything

― 3, Thursday, 28 July 2005 17:12 (7 years ago) Permalink

to be fair Blade was the movie that taught me Stephen Dorffff was not the worst actor ever, it's just that he plays only one role ever.

― gear (gear), Thursday, 28 July 2005 17:15 (7 years ago) Permalink

yeah blade is awesome you maniacs

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 17:15 (7 years ago) Permalink

blade 2, did not care for.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 17:15 (7 years ago) Permalink

Ron Perlman, you nut!

― gear (gear), Thursday, 28 July 2005 17:16 (7 years ago) Permalink

it was lame, RP notwithstanding

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 17:16 (7 years ago) Permalink

to me, blade's thing of vampires-as-club-kids was totally more fun than blade 2's lame old vampires-as-goth/metal-losers

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 17:17 (7 years ago) Permalink

I can understand that point.

― gear (gear), Thursday, 28 July 2005 17:19 (7 years ago) Permalink

The only discussions I ever see about Spielberg movies are whether or not they suck, quite frankly. If that's being thought provoking, well then hog tie me and call me ma'am, I'm fucking wrong about him not being thought provoking, but you people have a seriously warped idea of "thought provoking" if 8,000 internet discussions that boil down to "HE FUCKING SUCKS" "NO HE DOESN'T" "HELLO I AM CAPTAIN PICARD" etc are an actual qualification as to why a film could be considered "thought provoking."

A 200+ thread about how Minority Report's ending sucks /= the film explores deep, dramatic, adult issues in a refreshing and/or interesting manner.'

Blade is one of those movies I have seen all of, but not in the correct order or all at the same time, I am pretty sure.

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Thursday, 28 July 2005 17:19 (7 years ago) Permalink

Nobody said Blade was bad!!! I was just saying that yeah the "film student" sheep parade made it seem so dope that somebody would call it the greatest film of all time and mean it! It was like I instantly assumed he would have another 24 films underneath it rounding out a selection of strangely brilliant but often disregarded/overlooked films and that he would be cool to talk to about movies, but he actually turned out to just be a Crutchfield gearhead with a modicum of interest in well-executed screen violence.

― TOMBOT, Thursday, 28 July 2005 17:21 (7 years ago) Permalink

I think the reason why Steve Spielberg annoys me as much as he does isn't because most of his movies actively suck, most are passable, fine, whatever. It's that most of them have the potential to be great movies, brilliant movies, fantastic movies, best movie ever type movies if anyone, ANYONE AT ALL, else directed them! I mean, like, maybe even Pauly Shore could be more subtle. He's got the biggest hamfists in the industry and I can't get past the over-obvious, Hallmark-movie-of-the-week emotional jizz he wants to bukkake his stories with.

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Thursday, 28 July 2005 17:23 (7 years ago) Permalink

I remember the aforementioned film school douchebag laughed at me when I said Sergio Leone was a slightly better director than Stanley Kubrick and that Repo Man was better than Raging Bull ("Impossible! That's the Best Film Of The Eighties!").

― gear (gear), Thursday, 28 July 2005 17:26 (7 years ago) Permalink

I still maintain that Sugarland Express is Stephen Steilverb's (sic) best film.

― Deric W. Haircare (Deric W. Haircare), Thursday, 28 July 2005 17:26 (7 years ago) Permalink

YOU LIE LIKE A KITE NO ONE SAID THAT THING ABOUT THE EIGHTIES!!!!! :O

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Thursday, 28 July 2005 17:27 (7 years ago) Permalink

A BOLD PROCLAMATION I REALIZE

― gear (gear), Thursday, 28 July 2005 17:28 (7 years ago) Permalink

THAT'S NOT EVEN SCORCESE'S BEST FILM FROM THE 80S!!! I WILL HURT THAT PERSON.

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Thursday, 28 July 2005 17:28 (7 years ago) Permalink

I hate this thread!!!!!!

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Thursday, 28 July 2005 17:28 (7 years ago) Permalink

I also maintain that Matrin Scorsaysay (sic) is one of the most overrated directors ever. And that Bringing Out The Dead is his best film.

― Deric W. Haircare (Deric W. Haircare), Thursday, 28 July 2005 17:41 (7 years ago) Permalink

oooh... you go you grate big contrarian you.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Thursday, 28 July 2005 17:44 (7 years ago) Permalink

you are very bold, congratulations

xpost

― derrek j. ballwash, Thursday, 28 July 2005 17:44 (7 years ago) Permalink

Trust me, it's not for the sake of being contrary. I would love to see what the rest of the world sees in Raging Bull and Taxi Driver, but they don't really do much for me. Scorsese often seems a little too wrapped up in potential accolades to let himself go and make entertaining/involving films.

To bring the topic back 'round, though, Spielberg & Scorsese together might make an interesting movie.

― Deric W. Haircare (Deric W. Haircare), Thursday, 28 July 2005 17:49 (7 years ago) Permalink

Black man named Spike Lee makes Malcolm X = high-school filmstrip

Allyzay, you have hit it on idiot-male 'debates' on the internets! However, you're still all wet on equating Spielberg with run-of-the-mill schmaltz. (at least post-Color Purple, that was a mistake)

I'm glad you guys hate S.S. given the snarky twaddle you like tho. "Schindler's List" has more intentional laughs than several Coen films.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 28 July 2005 18:01 (7 years ago) Permalink

sure you meant intentional there?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 18:03 (7 years ago) Permalink

...snarky twaddle...

-- Dr Morbius (wjwe...), July 28th, 2005.

IRONY

― TOMBOT, Thursday, 28 July 2005 18:05 (7 years ago) Permalink

hey, I went to film school and I hardly know anybody who really likes Spielberg too much!

Excepting Jaws and Close Encounters and maybe Jurassic Park (<1997) I don't really care about him.

My big issue with his films is the race/gender-handling and how awkward-but-well-intentioned-he is w.r.t. this.

― Remy (x Jeremy), Thursday, 28 July 2005 18:10 (7 years ago) Permalink

I dunno why I'm getting lumped in with Morbius here, since we don't agree about many films at all, and especially not Spielberg in particular...? but whatever I AM AN IDIOT yes, oh the critical depth of the internet...

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 28 July 2005 18:12 (7 years ago) Permalink

I see from older threads Tombot always has been.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 28 July 2005 18:14 (7 years ago) Permalink

(altho I do enjoy Morbius' sparkling wit and winning smile)

x-post

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 28 July 2005 18:14 (7 years ago) Permalink

Ally, you're totally right about the hamfistedness. The way he handles scenes sorta remind me of a fat man at a pig roast.

― Remy (x Jeremy), Thursday, 28 July 2005 18:17 (7 years ago) Permalink

he handles scenes hungrily and excitedly?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 18:18 (7 years ago) Permalink

― Remy (x Jeremy), Thursday, 28 July 2005 18:20 (7 years ago) Permalink

Name one of these 'hamfisted' scenes in "E.T.," which is impossible to think of in terms of being done better by anyone else.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 28 July 2005 18:20 (7 years ago) Permalink

i feel like steven spielberg on a movie shoot (xp)

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 18:20 (7 years ago) Permalink

I don't like E.T.! It's sorta like being assraped by an apologetic emo kid who cries at cruelty and listens to Dashboard Confessional.

― Remy (x Jeremy), Thursday, 28 July 2005 18:22 (7 years ago) Permalink

so why don't you like it then?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 18:23 (7 years ago) Permalink

to me the best stuff in ET isn't the sentimentality, it's the scary parts!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 18:24 (7 years ago) Permalink

I really like Close Encounters, though. Even though Dreyfus sorta annoys me, Truffaut makes up the lost points in cuteness at the end.

(And I don't rememeber ET that well, just that I found it profoundly mawkish. I think if I saw it again I might like exactly what you like, M., - the weird and freaky bits.)

― Remy (x Jeremy), Thursday, 28 July 2005 18:27 (7 years ago) Permalink

especially when the family home is covered in plastic and ET is all white and chalky! brrr.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 18:29 (7 years ago) Permalink

The best stuff about E.T. is sad. The worst stuff about E.T. is bad. The stuff I don't care about in E.T. is Dad.

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Thursday, 28 July 2005 19:12 (7 years ago) Permalink

not sure why Schindler's List catches flak, because sure, there are several moments that stand out as being wrongheaded, but the rest is pretty amazing.

― gear (gear), Thursday, 28 July 2005 20:44 (7 years ago) Permalink

I have an irrational hatred of sappy Holocaust films. I only saw Schindler's List once - when I was a teenager - and I remember that I really lost interest as soon as all moral ambiguity was removed from Schindler's character, somewhere around halfway through. Without that internal conflict driving the story (why is Schindler doing this, what are his motives, etc.) making things more complicated, I quickly grew bored with it. There were no characters with the adequate depth to hold my attention. Plus the ending with all the old people planting flowers on his grave = puketastic.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 28 July 2005 20:50 (7 years ago) Permalink

I'll take Soderbergh over Spielberg any day. Yeah, his attempts at depth are painful (cf. Solaris) but he's much better at making energetic pop fun (which seems to be Spielberg's main defense here), as he has less of a tendency to try for Grand Statements and mawkish sentiment.

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Thursday, 28 July 2005 20:51 (7 years ago) Permalink

Sugarland Express, Duel, Raiders, most of what I remember of Close Encounters = CLASSIQUE (Empire of the Sun is pretty good too--although it seemed better when I was 13.) Everything else basically = DUD.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 28 July 2005 20:54 (7 years ago) Permalink

"especially when the family home is covered in plastic and ET is all white and chalky! brrr."

Unfortunately this part of ET lasts what 5-10 minutes.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 28 July 2005 20:59 (7 years ago) Permalink

Empire of the Sun is the only Spielberg movie I've seen recently enough to comment on in any in-depth way - I admit the rest of my opinions here are cobbled together from hazy, possibly youthfully distorted, recollections.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 28 July 2005 21:06 (7 years ago) Permalink

You should rent Sugarlang Express! It's really good.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 28 July 2005 21:13 (7 years ago) Permalink

the IMDB plot summary for Sugarland is hilarious:

"Lou-Jean, a blonde woman, tells her husband, who is imprisoned, to escape."

when being blonde is outlawed, only outlaws will be blonde....

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 28 July 2005 21:17 (7 years ago) Permalink

I think that sentence needs more commas.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 28 July 2005 21:18 (7 years ago) Permalink

number of answers on this thread before Alex's post? 187. Just anotha homicide.

― gear (gear), Thursday, 28 July 2005 21:19 (7 years ago) Permalink

apropos of nothing

― gear (gear), Thursday, 28 July 2005 21:19 (7 years ago) Permalink

as he has less of a tendency to try for Grand Statements and mawkish sentiment.

Yeah, there was nothing at all mawkish and MOR and suburbanite about Traffic.

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Thursday, 28 July 2005 21:30 (7 years ago) Permalink

Schizopolis vs. Minority Report

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 28 July 2005 21:36 (7 years ago) Permalink

haha, Traffic! oh man. so much crap in that movie.

― gear (gear), Thursday, 28 July 2005 21:36 (7 years ago) Permalink

I felt like just about the only one who thought Erin Brockovich was a lot more confident and breezy and enjoyable than Traffic. It must've been his Hawks film.

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Thursday, 28 July 2005 21:39 (7 years ago) Permalink

yeah Traffic had its low points ("she's sunk so low, she's fucking a BLACK MAN! OH THE HORROR!" + the heavily telegraphed witness killing, Cheadle's final grandstanding scene, etc.) but there was a LOT about it that was admirable and absorbing. Del Toro - come on, he was great. Pretty deft interweaving of multiple storylines, great use of different filmstocks and color schemes. Its sentiment is sorta Spielbergian in its heavy-handed moralizing, but considering no mainstream US movie had ever really tackled this subject you gotta hand it to Soderbergh for holding it together as well as he did.

(tho my favorite movie of his is THE LIMEY! Terence Stamp! blithely evil Peter Fonda! Yes!)

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 28 July 2005 21:41 (7 years ago) Permalink

I think there are probably a few mainstream US movies about drug traffiking, but the ones that are popping into my mind aren't all stone-faced about it. Brian De Palma has a couple.

I give you The Limey, though.

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Thursday, 28 July 2005 21:44 (7 years ago) Permalink

are you referring to the French Connection? gimme a break. the drug trafficking in that is just a backdrop for Hackman's tough-cop, uh, hackery. its very peripheral. it could just as well have been about diamond smuggling or something.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 28 July 2005 21:49 (7 years ago) Permalink

the Limey had the 'best' tasteless misogynist joke ever!

― latebloomer: You may order a puppet similar to this one (latebloomer), Thursday, 28 July 2005 21:55 (7 years ago) Permalink

The original version of Traffik was so much better than Soderberg's crap remake it isn't even funny.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 28 July 2005 21:56 (7 years ago) Permalink

I don't particularly care about the "perps" - I'm more interested in watching the cops themselves operate. The show is an invaluable window into the psychology of cops and the way they interact with people - always be assertive and/or condescending, don't let TV crews film actual take-down of suspects (somehow the TV cameras always seem to arrive AFTER the dude is already cuffed and on the ground), trust no one who isn't a cop, etc. After seeing this show so much there is definitely an easily identifiable "cop talk" mode of speaking, a way of being both pedantic and seemingly sympathetic at the same time. Its like the voice of a particularly exhausted baby-sitter who's only respite is in being blithely sadistic to the children.

Know the enemy, people.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:07 (7 years ago) Permalink

Black man named Spike Lee makes Malcolm X = high-school filmstrip

I agree with this, Malcolm X is one of my least favorite Spike Lee joints (though I have it in my Netflix, just to make sure that I'm right).

Anyway, I agree with the statements about Schindler's moral ambiguity (which is a matter of fucking historical record, why white wash the dude when his own actions quite frankly white washed his moral ambiguity anyway), also the whole Neeson speech at the end where he's quivering on the floor like I don't even know what, carrying on about how each item represents a person he could save...it's so....argh. I don't even know what it is, it's so high school play. This is a fault of Neeson was well as the director, cos Neeson is awful, absolutely atrocrious in the scene...and the girl in the red dress...and the really specific bookend about what the holocaust was about, which I remember even when I was a kid seriously alienating my mother whose non-jewish relatives were persecuted...Spielberg's whole agenda with that movie...the unnecessary nakedd women everywhere...the weirdly unambigious character played by Ralph Fiennes...Ugh. The movie has it's good qualities and has its heart in such the right place but goes so, so wrong.

I like movies like Downfall better, where everythying is not so...excuse the pun here...black and white.

Re: Soderberg, Alex is totally, totally, so unambiguously and so horrifyingly and so mind-shatteringly OTM about Traffic. That movie was not very good and the only things saving it was Benecio Del Toro, but that's Benecio for you, he even saved crappy boring Bond films for me. I like Soderberg's pop epics better, someone else touched upon his POP sensibility and how it is edgier, less hamfisted and LOOK AT ME than Spielberg's...Erin Brokovich and Ocean's Eleven are both fantastic movies, despite all odds (ie Julia Roberts and Andy Garcia). They are both fantastic pieces of film-making, inherently entertaining and watchable and the messages (esp. EB) are not so I AM GOING TO HAMMER THIS INTO YOUR HEAD SO HARD YOU WILL NOT KNOW WHERE YOUR ASS IS AND YOUR HEAD IS ANYMORE as Spielberg tends to be. Soderberg's more "serious" movies...well...Solaris was shit, dude. Let's hope he remakes Posiedon Adventure real soon.

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:08 (7 years ago) Permalink

haha - how did my COPS thread ost get over here! sorry.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:09 (7 years ago) Permalink

Though I will say I have a big bias against Liam Neeson cos of that time he called me real drunk to bitch about his co-op bill being off by $20. He used to always go to this restaurant I used to frequent all the time, Santa Fe, and he was always drooling drunk, like a moron. His wife was so hot though.

xpost Why apologize, it was a great post, better than expected, and I was highly entertained and quite frankly, I salute you, sir, for that post.

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:11 (7 years ago) Permalink

Spike Lee has definitely made some bad films (the last one, Girl 6, the Malcolm X one definitely trends towards the preachy although I wouldn't say it is bad) but even his most over-ambitious failed experiments are more fun to watch than say AI or Saving Ryan's Private.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:16 (7 years ago) Permalink

To all the Benicio Del Toro love (re Traffic, a movie I also dislike), I have to dissent. He was ok, but I always scratched my head at why HE got all the attention and the awards. Don Cheadle and Luis Guzman, superb in so many Soderbergh films (Guzman was particularly fine as Terence Stamp's sidekick in The Limey), were much more memorable and were ignored.

Del Toro only started to earn the plaudits he earned for Traffic in 21 Grams. Before then he was coasting on mannerism and sheer weirdness.

― Alfred Soto (Alfred Soto), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:18 (7 years ago) Permalink

I dunno, Spike vs. Spielberg is a tough call for me, Lee's such a sloppy filmmaker. He's almost the antithesis of Spielberg - the pedantry without the style. He really only has one great, perfect film and that's "Do the Right Thing". There's good stuff scattered in his other movies (I haven't seen 25th Hour) but by and large its one trainwreck after another... Girl 6, Get on the Bus, Bamboozled, Summer of Sam, etc. Has there ever been a Spike Lee movie that *doesn't* end with someone getting murdered...?

x-post

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:20 (7 years ago) Permalink

Taking Sides: Steven Spielberg vs Ron Howard.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:21 (7 years ago) Permalink

Just so we're clear that there's a baseline here.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:23 (7 years ago) Permalink

Del Toro has always been a very good physical presence and his charisma is because of his weird mannerisms, he's like Nicolas Cage honed to a zen-like haiku of hand shapes of head tilts

― gear (gear), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:23 (7 years ago) Permalink

That's the thing I see with Spike Lee...even with his failed efforts (I TOTALLY DISAGREE WITH YOU WITH THE LAST ONE UNLESS THE LAST ONE IS NOT "THE 25TH HOUR" AND I FELL ASLEEP FOR SEVERAL YEARS???), I think there is something a lot more fun to watch...something a lot more provocative to think about, than a lot of top directors, Spielberg included.

I think that's part of the thing, right? I feel like Spielberg, "recently" meaning since 1990, wants us to THINK about his movies. THINK SO HARD yr brain explodes, right? But he doesn't give us that much more than base questions we might have already had. What questions does AI raise that you might have already had? What questions does it explore in a way that someone might unthink their other way of thinking? That's something I don't like. The feeling that I SHOULD be thinking, reconsidering, after watching Schindler's List, Saving Private Ryan, AI...except he doesn't give you anything besides a pretty middle-America-stereotype way of thinking about it. He doesn't actually explore the questions he raises, he doesn't give you anything different from what the Hollywood cliche says he should...

I won't tell you that Spielberg is a "bad" director...it's just that he's not a "good" director in my estimation of good either. I'd rather watch Lee or Scorcese's worst films than Spielberg's...because even Girl 6 or..well, wait, I won't defend recent Scorcese but even the Aviator gave me a bit to think about.

xpost Lee IS very sloppy...but in a way I like that about him. It's like there is TOO MUCH going on in his head to contain in one movie, you are left asking a question. I don't feel this sentiment about Do The Right Thing, Bamboozled, or 25th Hour. They are not sloppy movies, though you are left thinking. A lot. Summer of Sam and Girl 6 are really well meaining train wrecks...

Re: Del Toro, I agree that Cheadle deserves more love than he gets, but Del Toro is very good. Del Toro also looks like the swarthy Brad Pitt. Has anyone else noticed this? They're dopplegangers, cross-ethnicity. THink about it.

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:24 (7 years ago) Permalink

I felt like just about the only one who thought Erin Brockovich was a lot more confident and breezy and enjoyable than Traffic. It must've been his Hawks film.
-- Eric H. (ephende...), July 28th, 2005.

So OTM. My friends still think I'm fuckin' crazy. Popist entertainment vs Rockist Grand Statement.

― Alfred Soto (Alfred Soto), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:25 (7 years ago) Permalink

The last one I meant was She Hate Me.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:25 (7 years ago) Permalink

Andrew. If you ever pose a question that diabolical in my physical presence, I will punch you in the genitals.

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:26 (7 years ago) Permalink

I've seen the similarity, too! Way of the Gun would have been infinitely better if Pitt took the Philippe role and the two characters were brothers.

okay it still would have sucked...

― gear (gear), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:26 (7 years ago) Permalink

I admire Spike Lee's nerve. His most underrate film: Clockers.

― Alfred Soto (Alfred Soto), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:26 (7 years ago) Permalink

Clockers is a very good film! Mekhi Phifer couldn't quite hold his own with the rest of the cast, though.

― gear (gear), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:28 (7 years ago) Permalink

I think Clockers, Summer of Sam, 25th Hour and Get on the Bus (and the doc about the girls in Birmingham is excellent) all have really interesting elements. They are all seriously flawed in some way though, I won't deny that.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:28 (7 years ago) Permalink

How can you compare Lee with Spielberg? Lee is essentially a director of agitprop, with a few detours into character studies. Spielberg is an entertainer with delusions of grandeur.

― Alfred Soto (Alfred Soto), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:29 (7 years ago) Permalink

Beats me. Someone did it above.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:29 (7 years ago) Permalink

The 25th Hour, with all its longeurs and absurdities, was fantastic. It was one of the more convincingly paranoid films I've seen in recent years.

― Alfred Soto (Alfred Soto), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:29 (7 years ago) Permalink

The main reason I'm contributing is cuz I don't give a shit about Spielberg and I really enjoy Lee.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:30 (7 years ago) Permalink

I kind of like Traffic. I find it impossible to take even mildly seriously, so it's just like Ocean's Eleven w/ guns and sweaty crackhead teenagers. Ooooh lookit Catherine Zeta Jones go from society wife to dealer! Check out the bleach bypass effect in the Mexico footage!

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:31 (7 years ago) Permalink

25th Hour is seriously flawed, but it's still a great film. That is in part a testiment to the powers of the magnificient actors employed in it as well as a testiment to Spike Lee. It is a very powerful film to watch, moreso depending on your involvement in certain elements in NYC life. But it is significantly flawed, least of which being that Rosario Dawson couldn't pass for a Catholic schoolgirl teenager if her life depended on it. But yeah, it is a significant portrayal of paranoia and minor neurosises as I've seen on film, ever.

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:32 (7 years ago) Permalink

well goddammit when is he going to make that afrocentric-sci-fi film he's always been threatening to do? I would be SO into that. there's a script that writes itself.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:32 (7 years ago) Permalink

I want Delany to script that. It would be awesome.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:34 (7 years ago) Permalink

Xpost yes I agree with you that Traffic is enjoyable from that viewpoint but doesn't hold a candle to what it's meant to do..I think Soderberg is more of a POP filmmaker than he wants to admit..>I was serious about him doing a remake of the Poisiedon (sp who gives a shit I've had several drinks) Adventure.

re: 25th Hour I will fully admit that I'd watch Ed Norton read a phone book but it doesn't really diminish the fact that it'd a good movie. So is Bamboozled, even thoubgh it is a little bit of a mess. Bamboozled haunted me for a long time. The ending of that movie, whether stock "someone get killed tonight" Lee or not, is seriously disturbed and you'd have to have a heart of stone not to think about Savion Glover and people like him for a long, long time afterwards. Which is what I think is the power of Lee vs. Spielberg...they don't belong in the same category. Even if the biggest Lee messes I've seen , I've THOUGHT aobut them for ages and ages. I still think about Bamboozled...a deeply flawed movie (Mainly in Damon Wayans's character) but good nonetheless...sometimes. It still haunts me, the end of that film. I can't think of a Spielberg film that does that to me, even his best. Sometimes I think about how Raiders of the Lost ArK would be better with me instead of Karen Allen...but not the same thing, is it?

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:37 (7 years ago) Permalink

Bamboozled might actually be my favorite Lee film, despite its deep flaws and its obvious subservience to the 25th Hour (which is probably his best film, in competition with the good 'ol criterion choice, Do The Right Thing)

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:39 (7 years ago) Permalink

I couldn't make it all the way to the end of Bamboozled. I know there's supposed to be some "amazing" montage of little black sambos or whatever. I just got a little lost wrt to the characters and who was doing what and it just seemed so haphazard and formless I think I just turned it off and did the dishes instead...

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:40 (7 years ago) Permalink

Alex, you're a dreamer. Imagine a Spike Lee "Dhalgren"? Be so, so, so fucking k-rad.

― Remy (x Jeremy), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:40 (7 years ago) Permalink

Karen Allen is great in Raiders!! so much better than Mrs. Spielberg in the second. Every time I see Temple of Doom I wish someone would shoot her.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:41 (7 years ago) Permalink

Dude, Shakey, you and me both. Kate Capshaw is os bad in Doom...I mean that movie is seriously flawed but she's the biggest flaw. I mean why would Indie have time for her, after Karen Allen? She might not be as conventionally attractive but...damn.

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:43 (7 years ago) Permalink

I gotta say, as enticing an idea as it is, a Delany + Spike Lee collab would probably be rather hamstrung by the latter's weirdly conservative (almost reactionary) sexual politics.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:45 (7 years ago) Permalink

I LOVE Kate Capshaw! A most convincing ditz. She reminded me of Carole Lombard in My Man Godfrey.

― Alfred Soto (Alfred Soto), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:45 (7 years ago) Permalink

Alfred Soto, you are insane.

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:46 (7 years ago) Permalink

she doesn't do anything particularly ditzy in Temple. all she does is WHINE. "Indeeeee, I'm going to crryyyyyyyy" arrrrgh sacrifice the bitch to Kali already!

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:47 (7 years ago) Permalink

Uh, technically, Temple of Doom is a prequel to Raiders. So the Capshaw love affair came before the Allen one.

I wish I didn't know this.

― Deric W. Haircare (Deric W. Haircare), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:48 (7 years ago) Permalink

Dude, I know that by any standard she deserves immolation, but she played the hell out of a puerile stereotype.

― Alfred Soto (Alfred Soto), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:49 (7 years ago) Permalink

True, Shakey Mo. (Like 6 xpost). And I say that after having seen She Hate Me (subtitle: "Black Gigli").

― Remy (x Jeremy), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:50 (7 years ago) Permalink

yes, Indy clearly got exhausted with her. I was more annoyed that he went from Karen Allen to the Nazi.

― gear (gear), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:50 (7 years ago) Permalink

i alreayd know that Doom is a prequel buut STILL wtf. find someone more firey. EWven Michelle Pfieffer would be preferable and she's like the opposite fo fire. That means she is WATER. Kate Capshaw=mud, therefore.

xpost Karen Allen to the Nazi iks like a whole different level of disappointment.

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:51 (7 years ago) Permalink

"Uh, technically, Temple of Doom is a prequel to Raiders. So the Capshaw love affair came before the Allen one."

No. In Raiders its clearly established that Allen and Indy had met before - long before - back when Indy was still working with her professor father (which would imply they met back when Indy was a student or at least not an academic authority in his own right, ie, prior to Temple of Doom).

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:51 (7 years ago) Permalink

(altho once again the Indy tactic of making the films out of sequence raises a whole host of continuity problems, not just that one. for example, in Raiders Indy says he doesn't believe in magic or religious "mumbo jumbo" - yet in Temple of Doom he witnesses firsthand several things which are CLEARLY magic/mystical mumbo jumbo, ie, the magic of those dumb stones...)

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:54 (7 years ago) Permalink

Right, but was there romance between Indy & Allen pre-Raiders?

― Deric W. Haircare (Deric W. Haircare), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:55 (7 years ago) Permalink

yeah, Shakey's right. I guess even Indy has to go through that Woody Allen period and favoring M. Hemingway over L. Lasser.

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:55 (7 years ago) Permalink

If Indy's taste in women takes an arguable decline over time, how will they top a Nazi in the fourth film?

― Deric W. Haircare (Deric W. Haircare), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:56 (7 years ago) Permalink

hahaha - in terms of enjoyable filmmakers who have been around for 25+ years, Woody Allen absolutely slays Spielberg. In my humble pseudo-intellectual Jewish nerd estimation.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:58 (7 years ago) Permalink

Jennifer Lopez. xpst

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:58 (7 years ago) Permalink

Tara Reid

― gear (gear), Thursday, 28 July 2005 22:59 (7 years ago) Permalink

Calista Flockhart

― gear (gear), Thursday, 28 July 2005 23:00 (7 years ago) Permalink

John Rhys-Davies

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Thursday, 28 July 2005 23:00 (7 years ago) Permalink

(I can't remember the Raiders script well enough - even tho I've seen the film more than a dozen times at least - but I think there's some kind of "you're such an asshole for leaving me" schtick Allen lays on Indy when they first meet up in that Siberian bar...? which is an amazing scene, btw)

x-post

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 28 July 2005 23:00 (7 years ago) Permalink

you have to admit, the Nazi was hot.

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Thursday, 28 July 2005 23:01 (7 years ago) Permalink

the implication I got from that scene was that Indy is a lot older than her, like he deflowered her when she was 12 or something. "I was a child!"

― gear (gear), Thursday, 28 July 2005 23:01 (7 years ago) Permalink

Indiana Jones: pedophile, Nazi-lover, and hero.

― Deric W. Haircare (Deric W. Haircare), Thursday, 28 July 2005 23:04 (7 years ago) Permalink

sounds like a Michael Moorcock novel! allRIGHT!

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 28 July 2005 23:05 (7 years ago) Permalink

that reminds me of the time in film class when a girl wrote a short film script that we were all supposed to read in class. It was incredibly creepy. Her name was Jen and she had a crush on this guy named Tony in class, and she was supposed to choose who would read what parts. The script was about a 9 year old girl named Jen seducing a 35 year old guy named Anthony, in extremely graphic fashion, and she chose herself and Tony to read the roles. The class was horrified, the professor was uncomfortably ecstatic.

― gear (gear), Thursday, 28 July 2005 23:08 (7 years ago) Permalink

sounds like Solondz's "Storytelling"...

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 28 July 2005 23:10 (7 years ago) Permalink

it was pretty hilarious, actually. This same girl filmed her brother and his girlfriend having sex for an "art film".

― gear (gear), Thursday, 28 July 2005 23:12 (7 years ago) Permalink

jeezus, film school... that reminds me of an acquaintance of mine in college (at the time a budding "college lesbian") who did a similar thing for her senior project. Except she just tried to draft whoever she could to do the movie, asking people if they wanted to be in her film, have sex with whoever, including her (not too attractive, I might add) self - she seemed to think a woman filming people having sex was somehow inherently worthy of scrutiny. I don't know if she ever actually went through with it...

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 28 July 2005 23:16 (7 years ago) Permalink

I went to film school! Steven Spielberg did not!

― walter kranz (walterkranz), Thursday, 28 July 2005 23:34 (7 years ago) Permalink

He probably visited a few times though, like I did.

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Thursday, 28 July 2005 23:59 (7 years ago) Permalink

Shakey Mo I lumped you in with Dr Populist Snobbery because you made the ocmment about Amistad which made me think you were trying to up this thread's ante into race-baiting liberal white guilt bullshit land, I mean DUHHHH Schindler's List -> Amistad -> OH THE POOR ROBOTS IN THE FUTURE -> et fucking cetera it's all the same, it doesn't actually matter that Spike Lee is one set of DNA and Spielberg is another. If they were fucking twin brothers I'd still prefer a Spike Lee movie 89% of the time because like Ally sez you can actually feel some aftereffect from his films that isn't strictly "wow jeez I'm sure glad that shark is dead!" and so forth.

Being that we own like 600 DVDs and go through at least 3-4 netflix movies a week, we do like us some crap, but the only Spielbergs we have are EOTS, Duel, and the Indy box. Point being: he blows ass.

I do own Traffic. It's not a superwatchable excitement popfest, no, but as an amalgam of a few short slice-fo-life novellas made into an epic, it's great, and beautiful to watch and listen to. I'm a sucker for the sustained chords in Benicio's ballpark at the end.

I think what everybody on this thread needs to do is go rent Buffalo Soldiers and see where Lee AND Spielberg have completely missed the fuck out.

― TOMBOT, Friday, 29 July 2005 00:30 (7 years ago) Permalink

Buffalo Soldiers was shit.

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Friday, 29 July 2005 00:43 (7 years ago) Permalink

Traffic gets a bad-rap. I don't think it's half as po-faced and self-serious about drugs or US policy as people assume (compared to, say, Requiem For A Dream). Tombot OTM, I was too sarcastic with my earlier comments (though they're true). I like it because it is really just a small film writ large.

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Friday, 29 July 2005 00:45 (7 years ago) Permalink

Stylistically, Requiem for a Dream is the least serious movie I can imagine. I sort of wish it weren't about drugs, all told, but I guess a horror movie needs some sort of tangible "horror." Think, though, on how much more amusing the film might have been if it had taken place in a fat camp instead of NJ tenement buildings.

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Friday, 29 July 2005 00:49 (7 years ago) Permalink

Traffic and Requiem for a Dream both present as the ultimate degradation a pretty young white woman having sex with a black man for drugs. Requiem's got some snazzy stuff in it, but it's shallow nasty crap. Traffic's not as nasty, but it's still plenty crappy and shallow. Duds both.

As for SS, he's pretty great through Raiders and progressively spottier since.

― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Friday, 29 July 2005 00:55 (7 years ago) Permalink

Actually some of us just see it as a pretty young woman having sex with a man for drugs. Honestly, just because the current topology of our stupid fucking country happens to make it so that a story is just possibly a little more poignant when it's made a bit realistic and cuts closer to the bone of the people most likely to see it isn't any reason to lambast the fucking movie. Oh jesus you know killer whales have attacked humans too, you know, what the fuck, you classist directors. As if Mammalia is always the innocent!!! You and your fucking agenda!!! God knows we have to be totally fucking suspicious of everything that has anything to do with ethnicity. Open the floodgates, I will now take all your splendidly unique and insightful questions regarding patronizing colorblindness and why daddy knows best.

....

I'm partial to Buffalo Soldiers because that's about 50% or more of our active duty military, especially during peacetime, so as long as guys like NRQ want to request more "convincing war movies" why not show a little bit of the real fucking deal?

― TOMBOT, Friday, 29 July 2005 01:05 (7 years ago) Permalink

Stylistically, Requiem for a Dream is the least serious movie I can imagine

Have you ever DONE drugs, Eric? More importantly, have you ever been on speed?

― TOMBOT, Friday, 29 July 2005 01:09 (7 years ago) Permalink

requiem for a dream is a total joke

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 29 July 2005 01:09 (7 years ago) Permalink

It didn't seem that degrading to me, there wasn't a moralizing element to it (the film being harder on authority figures than users). The drug dealer was even nice.

And Requiem wasn't 'sex with a black man' it was 'doing a double-dildo scene on a mirrored coffee table in front of a bunch of Wall Street fuckers.'

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Friday, 29 July 2005 01:10 (7 years ago) Permalink

Yeah movies that stick in your head for four years after one viewing and make you want to wade out into speeding traffic afterwards are pretty stupid. Kind of like Pollock in that regard. I believe in both cases it would probably depend on your personal experience with some of the themes of the subject matter at hand, no? See again my ear-to-ear grinning at Buffalo Soldiers

I've got no intentions of rewatching any of those three movies again anytime soon, mind you, but at least I remember shit that happened in them and felt affected by the events depicted, which is more than I can say for anything our thread topic man has done since he did that one movie with our very own Alba, I think he was 10 or 11 at the time?

― TOMBOT, Friday, 29 July 2005 01:15 (7 years ago) Permalink

You've spoken to 50% or more of our active duty military, tombot?

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Friday, 29 July 2005 01:19 (7 years ago) Permalink

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 29 July 2005 01:19 (7 years ago) Permalink

clockers woulda been great if lee didn't bet on the future of videogames being bizarre 3d headgear. also if there were not sweet part to the bittersweet ending.

also i've never seen a spielberg movie that made me want to talk about it. there is a good article on war of the worlds in the new york review of books though -- it didn't make me want to see the movie, but it made me want to reread the book but i think they ran the article coz they're selling reprints of the gorey illustrated version of the book.

wait.. i forgot that i heart the indy films too. they're totally funny.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Friday, 29 July 2005 01:20 (7 years ago) Permalink

IN any case, Requiem makes being high on speed/heroin look like a neverending carnival ride. Even the Wall Street sex party is lit like an exploding disco ball. I doubt that's entirely accurate.

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Friday, 29 July 2005 01:20 (7 years ago) Permalink

And Requiem wasn't 'sex with a black man' it was 'doing a double-dildo scene on a mirrored coffee table in front of a bunch of Wall Street fuckers.'

The 'sex with a black man' came before that, and was the deciding moment in her basically turning into a drug whore.

And yes, it's very enlightened to say it doesn't matter what race they were, but it was still two young pretty white women having sex with black men for drugs, in both cases being clearly presented as depths-to-which-drugs-will-make-you-sink. And realistic? It was realistic that the rich suburban princess in Traffic went from honor student to ghetto crackhead in two weeks or whatever? It was like the worst reefer-madness hysteria imaginable.

― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Friday, 29 July 2005 01:21 (7 years ago) Permalink

My bad, I don't/didn't remember the sex scene then.

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Friday, 29 July 2005 01:26 (7 years ago) Permalink

sterling otm abt geoff obrien nybooks review, its fantastic online and free, i havent seen the movie. itll take me hrs to follow up and see to how requiem is horrible, not to mention et the extra ts reeces pieces, my parents loved those movies, close encounters, how comping spielberg w lee or steve sodenb is bullshit cuz spielbergs movies are for children! i havent seen that accounted for

plus spielberg is abt setpieces and sodenb really isnt, i prefer the latter cuz sexier but this is apples and oranges, like hitchcock vs ford

― 006 (thoia), Friday, 29 July 2005 01:54 (7 years ago) Permalink

xp true sterling but apparently obrien reviews the sci fi spielbergs for them perennially, like ai and minority report if i remember, havent read those, not saying it isnt curious given how few movie reviews appear there period, just that its been going on

― 006 (thoia), Friday, 29 July 2005 02:00 (7 years ago) Permalink

xp bamboozled is my fav spike, also

― 006 (thoia), Friday, 29 July 2005 02:26 (7 years ago) Permalink

I've been waiting for 006 to provide some clarity to this thread.

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Friday, 29 July 2005 02:29 (7 years ago) Permalink

i defer to eric h. being hi is not like a carnival ride indeed. it doesnt even look like 1!

but above i only meant if you want to cf spielberg w anyone it shd be something anon like disney. like maybe steve year to year hasnt made anything as great as the incredibles, in awhile but maybe we cld be more rigorous abt our weight classes?

― 006 (thoia), Friday, 29 July 2005 02:51 (7 years ago) Permalink

haha i came home and signed on all revved up to argue about howard hawks but now it feels kinda redundant.

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Friday, 29 July 2005 04:05 (7 years ago) Permalink

Black man named Spike Lee makes Malcolm X = high-school filmstrip

well, are there any biopics about public figures that aren't kinda like high-school filmstrips? you have to admit it's light-years ahead of "nixon."

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Friday, 29 July 2005 04:11 (7 years ago) Permalink

6 raises a point... does anyone even TRY what spielberg's done? or do they only try after he's like done it already?

i mean schindler's list sorta opened the floodgates to emotionally manipulative holocaust flix -- jacob the liar, that one about the piano player (i think it was called "the jew who played piano good"? no, that wasn't it) if you want to stretch it, "life is beautiful" and etc. came out the same year as swing kids too.

same argt. can go for maybe a few of his other big blockbusters? like if nothing else he was the first to be that audacious. that was the dinosaur lure fersure -- i.e. we can take something outrageously schlocky that conjures up claymation and make it EXCITING and SHINY.

like once he taps that inner sap potential, everyone can follow suit, but until he comes up with the formula, it doesn't seem so obvious? or at least achivable?

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Friday, 29 July 2005 04:17 (7 years ago) Permalink

dinosaurs were exciting way before spielberg!

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Friday, 29 July 2005 04:20 (7 years ago) Permalink

xpost.. jfk and nixon were hardly filmstriplike!
neither was "the assassination of richard nixon"
or for that matter cromwell.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Friday, 29 July 2005 04:21 (7 years ago) Permalink

ok what was the last good dinosaur movie before jurrasic park?

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Friday, 29 July 2005 04:22 (7 years ago) Permalink

the song remains the same!

― j blount (papa la bas), Friday, 29 July 2005 04:29 (7 years ago) Permalink

jfk isn't a biopic sterling! neither is that "assassination" pic.

well, any ray harryhausen dinosaur movie is at least as good as JP, but i think the last one came out in like 1970. so i guess you're right actually. but i don't think the concept of a "dinosaur movie" is inherently schlocky!

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Friday, 29 July 2005 04:30 (7 years ago) Permalink

there was "the land before time," but that's probably not very good now that i'm no longer 7.

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Friday, 29 July 2005 04:31 (7 years ago) Permalink

I liked Buffalo Soldiers! But everybody I've watched it with has told me I'm crazy, inasmuch as it's "flawed" or (as I parse that) tpatently unmoralizing in the ball-yanking Spielberg/Lee/Soderbergh way. That being said, I think J.Lo has never contributed more to society than in Out of Sight.

― Remy (x Jeremy), Friday, 29 July 2005 05:27 (7 years ago) Permalink

The Pianist is pretty amazing

― gear (gear), Friday, 29 July 2005 05:30 (7 years ago) Permalink

I like corn on the cob.

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Friday, 29 July 2005 05:37 (7 years ago) Permalink

The Pianist is pretty amazing

Have ever done a The Pianist vs. The Piano vs. The Piano Teacher thread?

― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Friday, 29 July 2005 05:50 (7 years ago) Permalink

And for Spielberg, I think Kael sussed him pretty well right out the gate. From her Sugarland Express review, March '74:

The director, Steven Spielberg, is 26. I can't tell if he has any mind, or even a strong personality, but then a lot of good moviemakers have got by without being profound. He isn't saying anything special in The Sugarland Express, but he has a knack for bringing out young actors, and a sense of composition and movement that almost any director might envy. Composition seems to come naturally to him, as it does to some of the young Italians; Spielberg uses his gift in a very free-and-easy, American way -- for humor, and for a physical response to action. He could be that rarity among directors -- a born entertainer -- perhaps a new generation's Howard Hawks. In terms of the pleasure that technical assurance gives an audience, this film is one of the most phenomenal debut films in the history of movies. If there is such a thing as a a movie sense -- and I think there is (I know fruit venders and cabdrivers who have it and some movie critics who don't) -- Spielberg really has it. But he may be so full of it that he doesn't have much else.

― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Friday, 29 July 2005 06:00 (7 years ago) Permalink

that's pretty astute!

― latebloomer: You may order a puppet similar to this one (latebloomer), Friday, 29 July 2005 06:08 (7 years ago) Permalink

When she was on, she was on like a motherfucker.

― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Friday, 29 July 2005 06:10 (7 years ago) Permalink

Andrew. If you ever pose a question that diabolical in my physical presence, I will punch you in the genitals.

I'm just saying Steven Spielberg this and Steven Spielberg that, but let's not forget there are actual forces of evil in the world.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Friday, 29 July 2005 08:05 (7 years ago) Permalink

That you guys are discussing the chronology of Indy's romances... mixed-up Spielbergian priorities there. As Pauline Kael said when "Temple" came out, if only Raiders had been this much fun. I love the accusations of skirting 'SEXISM and RACISM' Temple drew ... yeah, like a real THIRTIES SERIAL, fer Chrissake.

Shakey, I grew up loving Woody Allen, and his decline pains me, but as far as filmmaking chops go vs Spielberg's, whose work would you rather see with the sound off?

And the "white man makes slavery movie" was beneath you; it's not like Richard Attenborough did it. Why not take SS's statement that he made Amistad for his black children at face value (yes he has some).

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Friday, 29 July 2005 12:58 (7 years ago) Permalink

WotW with the sound off < WotW with the sound on < WotW without a dialog track

Also there's no real arguing with the statement that Temple is more fun than Raiders: that view simply has nothing in common with my reality.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Friday, 29 July 2005 13:08 (7 years ago) Permalink

crusade > raiders > temple

(this is partly sentimental -- i saw last crusade in the cinemas like 4 times before seeing any of the others.)

― N_RQ, Friday, 29 July 2005 13:12 (7 years ago) Permalink

Sacrelicious! I'd almost agree actually, but I'd have to see Crusade a time or two more. It's hard to look rationally at Raiders, to get past the most parodied opening ever.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Friday, 29 July 2005 13:16 (7 years ago) Permalink

Which is itself a parody.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Friday, 29 July 2005 13:17 (7 years ago) Permalink

As regards the actual Steven Spielberg question, I'd go for both, but I don't really care about the schmaltz. There's so much stuff in his movies that other directors can't or won't do.

NB: obviously I'm not going to see anything with Tom Hanks in.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Friday, 29 July 2005 13:24 (7 years ago) Permalink

what does watching a movie with the sound off have to do with it? directors aren't just in charge of the visuals you know!! hello music/dialogue/SOUND DESIGN!!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 29 July 2005 14:07 (7 years ago) Permalink

well, yeah, but with allen there isn't much there that couldn't be achieved in the theatre... the sound design in speilberg is good anyway!

― N_RQ, Friday, 29 July 2005 14:13 (7 years ago) Permalink

just sayin' i hate that argument!!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 29 July 2005 14:15 (7 years ago) Permalink

OTM!

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Friday, 29 July 2005 17:09 (7 years ago) Permalink

(Just wanted to say that everything re: Lee vs Spielberg that Ally and Tom have said is OTM with the caveat that the ocean crossing in "Amistad" is on of the most soul-destroying, wrenching things I've evr watched in a movie theater, coming in just behind Oprah chopping up babies in "Beloved" and Matt Dillon fingering Thandie Newton in "Crash".)

― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 29 July 2005 17:23 (7 years ago) Permalink

i've heard it's worth seeing for that scene alone... i should get around to renting it one day.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 29 July 2005 17:24 (7 years ago) Permalink

Amistad is not terrible and there are good parts, like you just mentioned...it's just that it would've been so much better...

Oh and that Matt Dillon thing just made me nearly spit water out my nose.

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Friday, 29 July 2005 17:25 (7 years ago) Permalink

There is a particular incident in the ocean crossing montage that is actually making me tear up right now just thinking about it.

Ally, have you seen "Crash"? I'd love your opinion on it.

― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 29 July 2005 17:27 (7 years ago) Permalink

I've not seen it! My main reason for not seeing it was actually Matt Dillon! I plan to Netflix it.

Re: the way way up thread Requiem for a Dream thing...I can buy the argument being made in Traffic about stock characters, black man and white woman, but not so much Requiem for a Dream. I think that's missing the point entirely, especially since, as already mentioned, the far more memorable (and FAR more degrading and horrifying) sex scene is two white girls and about 30 investment bankers.

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Friday, 29 July 2005 17:32 (7 years ago) Permalink

So OTM re: RFAD.

RFAD was just deeply, ridiculously fucked up. The part where Leto's injecting into his gangrenous arm... YEAUGH.

― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 29 July 2005 17:36 (7 years ago) Permalink

ARGH GOD. I never want to see that film again, for the record.

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Friday, 29 July 2005 17:39 (7 years ago) Permalink

i couldn't make coffee or use a doorknob for weeks after watching that movie w/o cracking up

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 29 July 2005 17:52 (7 years ago) Permalink

I thought it was really, really paranoid and harrowing. It was like all of the great bits of Trainspotting with soul crushing despair substituted for comic relief. Ellen Burstyn was so fucking awesome.

― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 29 July 2005 17:54 (7 years ago) Permalink

i thought it was really moralizing and uptight and melodramatic!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 29 July 2005 17:57 (7 years ago) Permalink

Well yeah, but that and the jumpcutting was what made it awesome. The movie wouldn't have worked at all if it had gone for "sympathetic" or "realistic".

― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 29 July 2005 17:59 (7 years ago) Permalink

Yeah, I agree with that.

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Friday, 29 July 2005 18:13 (7 years ago) Permalink

RFAD didn't lose me until the very end, with Leto and Wayans in Deliverance State Penitentiary or whatever the fuck that was. It was really exciting and harrowing and so on and then took a big fat dump on that with the moralizing and melodramatic end.

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Friday, 29 July 2005 18:17 (7 years ago) Permalink

What would have been the point if it had been all Trainspotting-esque, ie "We've flirted with TEH DRUQKS but now we're older and wiser whew that was a close call"? It's so awesome that effectively goes "drugs will lead you to death row or the insane asylum, oh and along the way you will get limbs lopped off and have to pound a dildo in front of most of off-duty Wall Street; HAVE FUN, BUCKAROO *jump cut*"

― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 29 July 2005 18:19 (7 years ago) Permalink

most of them weren't strictly speaking jump cuts but i get what you mean; i found that stuff kinda goofy to be honest!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 29 July 2005 18:21 (7 years ago) Permalink

Movies move, hence the visual dynamics are generally more crucial than the other shit.

N_RQ right about Woody largely being filmed theater, tho beginning around "Manhattan" he started to move the camera nicely.

(I refuse to use "OTM" now that I'm picturing it tattooed on some of your rumps)

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Friday, 29 July 2005 18:22 (7 years ago) Permalink

I also like how it totally looks like everyone's going to have a happy ending right up until each character makes a slight error in judgement that promptly dumps them into the bowels of Hell. It's grossly unsubtle and that's why it so fucking awesome. (IMO)

― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 29 July 2005 18:23 (7 years ago) Permalink

what do you mean by movies move? how do they move in a way that sound doesn't? ever heard of stereo panning?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 29 July 2005 18:26 (7 years ago) Permalink

overall, dud. you can always tell which movies he's touched with his hammy fingers.

― AaronK (AaronK), Friday, 29 July 2005 18:28 (7 years ago) Permalink

it's easy, they usually have his director's credit front-and-center!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 29 July 2005 18:29 (7 years ago) Permalink

What about the ones touched by his bacony fingers?

― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 29 July 2005 18:29 (7 years ago) Permalink

mmmmm, bacon fingers.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 29 July 2005 18:30 (7 years ago) Permalink

would those be breaded and deep-fried slices of bacon?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 29 July 2005 18:30 (7 years ago) Permalink

i love how this thread is encompassing all varieties of human experience.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 29 July 2005 18:31 (7 years ago) Permalink

I think that perhaps Spielberg would be offended by all these pork references???

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Friday, 29 July 2005 18:32 (7 years ago) Permalink

I don't want the RFAD characters to reform, I just want them to meet less laughable miserable ends. Ellen Burstyn's wasn't bad, and even Connelly's was disturbing but not laughable - but that Leto/Wayans end was awful.

The last shot was pulling back from the hospital bed revealing his missing arm, wasn't it? That's almost Spielbergian in its lack of subtlety. Or Lucasian, had he screamed NOOOOOO.

The shoot-up montages didn't seem like much until I saw part of that Jason Schwartmann speedfreak movie and realized how much worse they could have been.

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Friday, 29 July 2005 18:32 (7 years ago) Permalink

I just saw DUEL for the first time a couple of weeks ago, and man, that movie fucking rules hardcore.

― n/a (Nick A.), Friday, 29 July 2005 18:33 (7 years ago) Permalink

I think I am genetically predisposed towards liking movies where Jared Leto is disfigured, dismembered and/or killed (ie every Jared Leto movie).

― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 29 July 2005 18:34 (7 years ago) Permalink

i also like these threads that go for hundreds of posts w/o one comment from the thread-starter.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 29 July 2005 18:35 (7 years ago) Permalink

In this case, you really can't blame him.

Cause "movies" originally meant "moving pictures." God...

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Friday, 29 July 2005 18:39 (7 years ago) Permalink

Yeah, Jared Leto only takes parts/gets offered parts where he gets the shit kicked out of him, doesn't he? The best bit of American Psycho is totally when he gets axed in the face to Huey Lewis and the News.

xpost for fuck's sake

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Friday, 29 July 2005 18:40 (7 years ago) Permalink

Cause "movies" originally meant "moving pictures." God...

This is completely awesome if you imagine it being said by Napolean Dynamite.

― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 29 July 2005 18:42 (7 years ago) Permalink

morbius you still don't have a point

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 29 July 2005 18:43 (7 years ago) Permalink

xpost - Lie. Nothing sounds awesome from the mouth of ND. Flat Mormon voice = evil.

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Friday, 29 July 2005 18:43 (7 years ago) Permalink

The best part about Morbius's post is actually that I can't even figure out what he's referring to, like who that is meant for. I'd like to think Jared Leto.

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Friday, 29 July 2005 18:47 (7 years ago) Permalink

Mind of Ally not retain more than 3 consec postssss.

OK, Jared Leto gettin his face pulped in Fight Club DID get me hard, and bye!

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Friday, 29 July 2005 18:59 (7 years ago) Permalink

But you guys, DUEL!

― n/a (Nick A.), Friday, 29 July 2005 19:02 (7 years ago) Permalink

i thought it was really moralizing and uptight and melodramatic!

I saw RFAD in a mostly empty theater, but there was a group of goth kids up in the front row, and at the end of the movie as they were walking out one of the girls was sobbing and going "That was SO wrong!" and one of the guys was like, "That movie must have been made by the Christian Coalition, man."

And re: the white girl/black guy blowjob-for-drugs encounter in that movie, I agree it's just one of several degradations the characters go through. It mostly stuck with me because I had recently seen Traffic, and it didn't seem quite a coincidence that both films went for that same reefer-madness cliche (YOUR GIRLS WILL FALL INTO THE CLUTCHES OF DARK-SKINNED MEN, O NO).

― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Friday, 29 July 2005 19:02 (7 years ago) Permalink

... but you guys: Pinky and the Brain!

― Remy (x Jeremy), Friday, 29 July 2005 19:04 (7 years ago) Permalink

... SeaQuest DSV! Columbo: Murder by the Book! Harry and the Hendersons!

― Remy (x Jeremy), Friday, 29 July 2005 19:05 (7 years ago) Permalink

Arachnophobia!

― David R. (popshots75`), Friday, 29 July 2005 19:13 (7 years ago) Permalink

Uh, Morbius, I DID read the posts leading up to yours. I mean I responded to one of them. That doesn't really change the fact that whatever point you were just trying to make was horribly disassociated from anything else occuring around it.

But, like, that's yr thang so it's be cool.

― Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Friday, 29 July 2005 19:19 (7 years ago) Permalink

you guys know they're making Spun 2?

― gear (gear), Friday, 29 July 2005 19:32 (7 years ago) Permalink

I wish I had not set this thread to mail its responses to me.

― DV (dirtyvicar), Friday, 29 July 2005 19:35 (7 years ago) Permalink

did anyone else enjoy Catch Me If You Can? overrated, but once you lay the hype aside it's a fun bit o fluff.

yeah I like it. Frankly I probably like Spielberg more often than I like Scorcese now.

― kyle (akmonday), Friday, 29 July 2005 21:24 (7 years ago) Permalink

his panoramas - classic
his people - dud (except when he's doing comedy)

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Friday, 29 July 2005 22:26 (7 years ago) Permalink

Close Encounters would be much better if he had left in the scenes deleted from the middle of the movie (that were in the original version?)

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Friday, 29 July 2005 22:31 (7 years ago) Permalink

Jaws = A
Close Encounters = A-
Empire of the Sun = B+
Jurassic Park = Bomb
Ryan = Neither
A.I. = **
Catch Me If You Can = *

I really want to see Duel, and maybe also Sugarland Express. A guy I lived with all 4 years of college was in Amistad, and I still haven't seen it. Some day.

also, for context...
Barton Fink = C+
Lebowski = B-
Sex, Lies and Videotape = B+
Erin Brockovich = **
Traffic = *
Ocean's Eleven = B
Do the Right Thing = A+
Mo' Better Blues = ***
Jungle Fever = *
Crooklyn = **
Pi = **
Requiem for a Dream = F

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Friday, 29 July 2005 23:05 (7 years ago) Permalink

what's with the stars AND letter grades?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Saturday, 30 July 2005 03:28 (7 years ago) Permalink

It's a Christgau thing.

― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Saturday, 30 July 2005 03:58 (7 years ago) Permalink

I've never understood the Christgau scale, but I think that's a benefit.

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Saturday, 30 July 2005 04:36 (7 years ago) Permalink

"traffic" = crap. hey, stevey, that part of cincy where the girl goes to buy crack has poor white people living there too. and the informant (played by miguel ferrer, one of the few good performances) getting killed in the most dumb dumb dumb dumb way possible (HI WE'RE THE DEA WE LIKE TO PARADE WITNESSES IN BROAD DAYLIGHT AND ORDER ROOM SERVICE EGGS FOR THEM) = fucking retardedly stupid. how soderbergh went from making a movie as good as "the limey" to that is beyond me.

― hstencil (hstencil), Saturday, 30 July 2005 06:16 (7 years ago) Permalink

11 months pass...

Just rescreened E.T. a couple of hours ago; hadn't seen it since 1991. It appalls me that anyone can accuse this film of sentimentality. The post-'70s malaise has rarely been explored this cogently: kids using Star Wars toys to cope with Dad running off to Mexico with a young tootsie, and their attractive mother, still dumbfounded and barely surviving.

It's got a marvelous rapt quality. There are scenes that defy description (E.T.'s ravaged corpse being chewed on by raccoons; Elliott in the backyard waiting for the alien to appear); others approach comic bliss, like the biology class sequence, with a drunk Elliott kissing his crush in the manner of John Wayne in The Quiet Man.

Henry Thomas gives one of the most intelligent child performances in film history; it's unlikely that Drew Barrymore will ever top her sassy, slattern-in-making Gertie.

Great one-liners too ("How do you explain school to a higher intelligence?").

― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Sunday, 23 July 2006 22:09 (6 years ago) Permalink

gotta see ET again.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Sunday, 23 July 2006 22:16 (6 years ago) Permalink

wow i was wondering why i never posted on this thread: i was in japan!

anyway--classic with dudly moments. i've argued for him all over ilx tho so i'll leave it at that.

― ryan (ryan), Sunday, 23 July 2006 23:28 (6 years ago) Permalink

Any faults with his films lie in the writing rather than the direction (not that he doesn't have a MASSIVE influence over this), he's a pretty flawless storyteller.

― chap who would dare to start Raaatpackin (chap), Monday, 24 July 2006 00:16 (6 years ago) Permalink

I really felt for him last week when creepy Tom Cruise turned up uninvited at an awards ceremony for him.

I need to see E.T. again too.

― GILLY'S BAGG'EAR VANCE OF COUPARI (Ex Leon), Monday, 24 July 2006 00:27 (6 years ago) Permalink

having read the writing behind Minority Report and now finally having seen what he did to it I must confess I'm confused as to what point our man chap is trying to make

― TOMBOT (TOMBOT), Monday, 24 July 2006 02:33 (6 years ago) Permalink

though not filled with nearly the vitriol I had when first arguing my points on this thread, I will say the right that this man can do and has done in filmmaking is being eroded rather rapidly by the wrong. Paycheck was a better treatment of the PKD causality-displacement themes than MR, for my money, and MR itself is nominally the stronger story of the two by a long shot. Though perhaps in trying to tell the more difficult-to-cinematize of the two, Steve bit off more than he could chew. He seems to be missing the mark for that reason a lot lately, with material that I can see myself enjoying immensely in a parallel universe where Spielberg doesn't repeat the same information over and over again in between rhythmless action set pieces, trying to teach me that 2 minus 2 is 0.

― TOMBOT (TOMBOT), Monday, 24 July 2006 02:39 (6 years ago) Permalink

9 months pass...

Pederastic Park?
by Adam Parfrey

A vicious sort of urban legend began to flourish about the time of Richard Gere's alleged alliance with rectal rodents. Its subject was Steven Spielberg, and the gossip had to do with the director's overweening fascination with child actors. Mindful that hearsay is sometimes false, we are withholding the delicious details. But the fact that this rumor exists at all confirms an underlying unease over the presumably innocent entertainments created by Hollywood's oldest Wunderkind.

Spielberg's latest theme park-style extravaganza, "Jurassic Park," isn't as explicitly swishy as his failed "Hook," but it reveals components of the auteur's personality that have parents wondering about the movie's appropriateness for children.

"King King," "The Lost World," and "Godzilla," three monster epics cannibalized by "Jurassic Park," achieved their thrills without resorting to on-screen menacing of tots. Indeed, only on milk cartons can we find children so physically raped as the celluloid juveniles of "Jurassic Park." The film's sadistic tone is established early on, when a fat child challenges the paleontological theories of protagonist Sam Neill. Neill turns on the boy, and in low, menacing tones, he demonstrates to the child how a prehistoric nasty would mangle and devour him. Adding a distinctly Peter Kurtenish frisson, Neill slashes near the child's belly and crotch with a large, sharp claw.
Perhaps among all our "childlike" wonderment with the subject of dinosaurs, we forget that child abusers commonly invoke the threat of large beasts to frighten and silence their victims. Is the director conjuring the trappings of childhood obsessions only to wield them for a darker purpose?

Although overtly sadistic, "Jurassic Park" was reined in by its obeisance to special effects; it revealed few of the excesses of "Hook," in which Spielberg's psychodramatic inclinations were allowed to roam free.

"Hook" is the culmination of over a decade of false starts in bringing J. M. Barrie's Peter Pan to the screen. At first, Spielberg was reportedly considering a live-action redo of the Disney animated feature, starring Michael Jackson as the perpetual pre-pube. But the auteur of suburban childhoos wasn't satisfied with a simple remake.

The high-concept Hollywood sound bite, "What if Peter Pan grew up?" not only indulged Spielberg's predilections, it provided the film's investors with a tinkingly trendy phrase redolent with the "recovery" metaphysics that have become the ethos for Hollywood's haut monde, the same haut monde who have lately forsworn the continual cocaine-and-Quaalude concatenations so relentlessly documented by former Spielberg producer Julia Phillips in her autobitchography, You'll Never Eat Lunch In This Town Again.

The recovery movement is led in part by ex-drunk John Bradshaw, who smilingly encourages his readers to throw off the ruinous shackles of adulthood in order to "liberate the inner child." It comes as little surprise that Steven Spielberg takes part in Bradshaw's therapies, which include workshops where "lullaby music is played and participants cradle and stroke one another."

Asking Steven Spielberg to liberate his inner child would be akin to asking a serial murderer to actualize his anger. By his own admission, Stevie has experienced little in the way of adulthood outside of his overprotective upbringing and the adulatory, toadying fantasy land of Hollywood. Bradshaw's "inner child" therapy is a mere baby-step away from the Diaper Pail Fraternity, a Sausalito-based group for grown men who revert to incontinent fantasy, where surrogate mommies exclaim and coo as they wipe the kinky kid-fetishists' dirty behinds.

Spielberg's is redolent not only of the inner-child component of recovery, but also its darker aspect: child molestation. Bradshaw seeks to place blame for psychological malaise on a dimly remembered past in which some form of traumatic abuse took place. The less the so-called abuse is remembered, the more convinced are Bradshawian therapists that it actually occurred. At the time that "Hook" went into production, all the radio and television talk shows fixated upon child abuse in a catharsis of mass scapegoating. Suddenly, millions of Americans were convinced that they had been molested by their nuclear family or ritually abused by Satanists.

On the crest of the child-abuse wave, Spielberg's Peter Pan project was transformed into Hook, whose ad campaign abandoned the traditional flying fairies in lieu of a stark visual of the prosthetic steel claw gleaming against a black background. The gruesome hieroglyphic was a perfect mnemonic device (see Hook, think Hook) ”but more importantly, it transferred any possible pedophilic overtones from Spielberg himself (the auteur hero) to the classically pederastic fantasy figure of Captain Hook, the fiend who spirits children away to a Neverland where Cabbage Patch foundlings enliven the sodomitical lives of Village People pirates.

Here, Spielberg could be evading responsibility for his alleged tendencies by projecting them onto his villain, a strategy employed by Hitchcock and other directors renowned for their sadistic inclinations.

Peter Pan had, of course, become such a dusty chestnut that almost no one would object to its pedophilic content.

Who would remember that its author, Sir James Barrie, was a full-blown boy fancier who never consummated his marriage to actress Mary Ansell and carried on a passionate "friendship" with the sons of Sylvia and Arthur Llewelyn Davies?

Even today, no one can comfortably explain why Barrie insisted on naming his eternal child "Pan," after the goatish satyr of mythology.

In a tradition begun by Sir Barrie, most stage productions of Peter Pan cast a boyish woman in the lead role, a transvestite tradition Spielberg may well have paid homage to by casting Glenn Close as the bearded pirate named "Gutless."

Pederastic organizations such as NAMBLA insist that children are wise, sexual creatures who should be given the opportunity to be fondled, sucked, and anally penetrated by middle-aged men.

The NAMBLA Bulletin has a special column called "Boys in the Media," tracking the doings of such Hollywood chickens as Macaulay Culkin, known affectionately in the Bulletin as "Mac." The self-described "Ganymedian" L. Martin, who write the "Boys in the Media" column, spoke by phone about Stephen Spielberg and Hook.

"Spielberg is known for his interest in young boys, certainly," said Martin. "A lot of the members have been talking about Hook, telling me how much they enjoyed it."

NAMBLA spokesman Renato Corazza refused to confirm or deny Spielberg's possible membership in the Man/Boy Love Association: "We don't divule our membership rolls."

And is it merely accidental that another pederastic magazine goes by the acronym P.A.N. (Paedo Alert News)?

Spielberg's costume designer Anthony Powell endows Hook's "Lost Boys" with a cute Benetton-meets-Oliver Twist look tailor-made for the chicken-hawk sensibility. Dance of the Warriors, a futuristic fantasy about a warrior cult of young boys who fight right-wing Christians for the privilege of having sex with aging boy-lovers, sports on its cover a salt-and-pepper boy couple who almost precisely mirror two of Spielberg's Lost Boys. The book appeared in the pedophilia sections of gay bookstores just at the time that Hook was going into pre-production.

Just who are Spielberg's Lost Boys? Walter Keane-style big-eyed orphans? Lord of the Flies in Suburbialand?

Hook's smarmy press kit tries to make each personality distinct. There's Rufio ("the proud leader of the Lost Boys, whose determined jousting with Peter for the honor of guiding the troupe of ruffians leads to a new understanding between the two rivals in Neverland"); Ace ("the Lost Boy with all the angles figured out for his peers"); Thudbutt ("whose imposing size belies his gentle disposition among the Lost Boys--but don't get him angry!"); No Nap ("a street urchin complete with suspenders, knockers, a newsboys cap...and a heart of roughened gold"); Latchboy ("the curly-top redhead who always finds himself in the thick of any mischief contrived by the band of tarnished angels"); Pockets ("one of the smallest Losy Boys, who has a particular soft spot for helping Peter get his wings in Neverland"); and Too Small ("the tiniest Lost Boy in stature but one of the feistiest in nature, who wears his pajamas through thick and thin").

Hook's emotional highlight, strangely absent from the shooting script's first revised draft, is the touchy-feely communion of the adult Peter Pan and the Lost Boys. We're treated to prolonged takes of the tykes touching and caressing Robin Williams's face and body.

When the Lost Boys smear war paint on Wiliams's naked torso, the idyll is reminiscent of a certain gay body-painting video advertised in The Advocate "that focuses on creative eroticism, that expands and extends the beauty of foreplay."

There's not room enough to detail the pedophilic implications of other Spielberg productions: the man/boy relationship in "Empire of the Sun," which begins with John Malkovich's comment about young Christian Bale's "sweet mouth" and reaches its emotional climax when Malkovich directs the chicken to move his cot next to his; the child-alien/human ectodermal interactions in Close Encounters; and the sanitized incest theme of Back To The Future.

However, it was E.T., Spielberg's most exalted triumph, which seems to clothe boy-love fantasy in New Age vestments.

Spielberg uses every trick in the director's chapbook to induce us to love a wrinkled, potbellied cosmic interloper that hides in boys' closets and communicates with a glowing, phallic finger.

It was young Henry Thomas's taunt to his twelve-year-old celluloid brother--"penis breath"--that had Spielberg conjure, if only for a disturbing instant, the image of a bald-faced lad with a cock in his mouth.

Although the "negligent" participants got off with nary a knuckle-rap, we must not forget that Spielberg also produced the actual snuff film "Twilight Zone," in which Vic Morrow and two young children were beheaded during filming.

Perhaps the most perverse aspect of Steven Spielberg's work is its obsessive posture of sentimental innocence.

Psychologists trained in the vocabulary of sex criminals often note the cloak of goo-goos and sugar frosting as the subconscious moral gymnastics of repression and guilt transference.

But now that "Jurassic Park" has more openly revealed the overtly sadistic aspect of Steven Spielberg's curious desires, there is only one more place to go for this self-styled avatar of contemporary myth. His movie, "Schindler's List," was filmed in Auschwitz.

― and what, Thursday, 3 May 2007 17:37 (6 years ago) Permalink

Bloody hell!

― kv_nol, Friday, 4 May 2007 08:25 (6 years ago) Permalink

hahah is that from Apocalypse Culture?

in Apocalypse Culture II there's an essay by Crispin Glover conveying similar sentiments

― latebloomer, Friday, 4 May 2007 08:37 (6 years ago) Permalink

but seriously that says more about the mindset of Adam Parfrey than it does Spielberg

― latebloomer, Friday, 4 May 2007 09:04 (6 years ago) Permalink

It seriously says that and what is a shit --- old news.

― Dr Morbius, Friday, 4 May 2007 13:19 (6 years ago) Permalink

OK seriously Morbs you think he agrees with all the christian warmonger spam he posts too?

― TOMBOT, Friday, 4 May 2007 13:47 (6 years ago) Permalink

Anyway between learning that spielberg is a closeted pedophile and LBJ had the CIA contract a french hitman to kill the sitting president I'm learning a lot from ILX lately

― TOMBOT, Friday, 4 May 2007 13:48 (6 years ago) Permalink

xpost

I've never read any of his Christian warmonger spam.

― Dr Morbius, Friday, 4 May 2007 13:50 (6 years ago) Permalink

lol

― félix pié, Friday, 4 May 2007 15:41 (6 years ago) Permalink

ts posting christian warmonger spam vs voting for ron paul

― and what, Friday, 4 May 2007 16:40 (6 years ago) Permalink

eat shit

― Dr Morbius, Friday, 4 May 2007 16:41 (6 years ago) Permalink

Coprophagia too?

― sexyDancer, Friday, 4 May 2007 16:45 (6 years ago) Permalink

stay gettin ur nambla on with curt1s dude i'm 24

― and what, Friday, 4 May 2007 16:48 (6 years ago) Permalink

3 months pass...

ILX demanded it--

THE 31 DAYS OF SPIELBERG blog!

http://damianarlyn.blogspot.com/

― Dr Morbius, Saturday, 11 August 2007 16:21 (5 years ago) Permalink

today, E.T.

― Dr Morbius, Sunday, 12 August 2007 15:35 (5 years ago) Permalink

this is one thread that makes me glad I no longer get replies to threads I started mailed to me.

― The Real Dirty Vicar, Monday, 13 August 2007 10:16 (5 years ago) Permalink

that's nice.

― Dr Morbius, Monday, 13 August 2007 13:18 (5 years ago) Permalink

Oopsies.

http://mattzollerseitz.blogspot.com/2007/08/from-editor.html

― Eric H., Thursday, 23 August 2007 19:24 (5 years ago) Permalink

Blogging is a rough world, man.

― milo z, Thursday, 23 August 2007 19:26 (5 years ago) Permalink

I'm sort of scared to re-read some of my old stuff (as well as stuff I read long ago, like most of Kael's reviews) for this very reason.

― Eric H., Thursday, 23 August 2007 19:30 (5 years ago) Permalink

haha

― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Thursday, 23 August 2007 19:41 (5 years ago) Permalink

yeah, I saw that. I guess I should read the plagiarized guy's book.

― Dr Morbius, Thursday, 23 August 2007 19:53 (5 years ago) Permalink

I guess I'll have to think twice before recycling what I already wrote about Cruising on my blog for a forthcoming Slant review.

― Eric H., Thursday, 23 August 2007 19:54 (5 years ago) Permalink

... then again, it's not plagarizing if I wrote it the first time around ... right?

― Eric H., Thursday, 23 August 2007 19:55 (5 years ago) Permalink

Did I mention that Shattered Glass is the most stomach-churning thriller ever?

― Eric H., Thursday, 23 August 2007 19:55 (5 years ago) Permalink

the Hayden Christensen thing? who are you plagiarizing now, Peter Travers?

I think rewriting from your own blog or ILX posting is not plagiarizing, it's "cannibalizing."

― Dr Morbius, Thursday, 23 August 2007 20:01 (5 years ago) Permalink

More like it's impossible for me to re-watch the film before I have to turn in the review, but I have no illusions it will be one of my better reviews.

the Hayden Christensen thing? who are you plagiarizing now, Peter Travers?

No, seriously, that movie is all sorts of squirmy uncomfortable.

― Eric H., Thursday, 23 August 2007 20:03 (5 years ago) Permalink

Hasn't Cruising got new footage? like the legendary fisting sequence?

― Dr Morbius, Thursday, 23 August 2007 20:06 (5 years ago) Permalink

Does it? If so, it's still supposedly sumbliminal, and probably wouldn't have much bearing on what I'd write about.

― Eric H., Thursday, 23 August 2007 20:08 (5 years ago) Permalink

btw Aaron Sorkin may be writing a Chicago 7 movie for S.S. to direct, certainly an event I've long thought should be a film, but only those two now likely have the pull to get made.

http://www.cinematical.com/2007/07/12/spielberg-may-direct-sorkins-script-about-68-democratic-conven/

Who'd be a good Abbie Hoffman? is Robert Downey too old?

― Dr Morbius, Thursday, 23 August 2007 20:10 (5 years ago) Permalink

OK, not "may be," he IS (at least for someone to direct)

― Dr Morbius, Thursday, 23 August 2007 20:11 (5 years ago) Permalink

"No, seriously, that movie is all sorts of squirmy uncomfortable."

I liked it. The more recent film that guy did with Chris Cooper and Mr. Witherspoon about the spy thing was really good too (is he still Mr. Witherspoon or did they get divorced?

― Alex in SF, Thursday, 23 August 2007 20:12 (5 years ago) Permalink

they're divorced, and, yeah, it's decent. No one will notice how good Chris Cooper was come award time. All the film lacked was a fisting sequence.

― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Thursday, 23 August 2007 20:16 (5 years ago) Permalink

how about JUDGE Hoffman? Richard Dreyfuss?

― Dr Morbius, Thursday, 23 August 2007 20:17 (5 years ago) Permalink

it was kind of hilarious how they waited until the last possible moment of the On The Lot finale for Spielberg to finally appear onscreen. I almost thought he wasn't gonna be there at all, like some light-filled doorway would just open up and the winner would walk off-camera to "meet Mr. Spielberg."

― Alex in Baltimore, Thursday, 23 August 2007 20:19 (5 years ago) Permalink

Who'd be a good Abbie Hoffman?

Sam Rockwell?

― Phil D., Thursday, 23 August 2007 23:01 (5 years ago) Permalink

I think rewriting from your own blog or ILX posting is not plagiarizing, it's "cannibalizing."

I managed to write about Cruising without recycling more than a couple phrases from before.

― Eric H., Monday, 3 September 2007 17:06 (5 years ago) Permalink

i dont know why we're talking about it here, but shattered glass is excellent. breach is interesting but not as good.

― s1ocki, Monday, 3 September 2007 17:15 (5 years ago) Permalink

It came up because the Spielberg blogger plagarized.

― Eric H., Monday, 3 September 2007 17:17 (5 years ago) Permalink

Which, for some reason, struck me as hilarious and scandalous.

― Eric H., Monday, 3 September 2007 17:18 (5 years ago) Permalink

8 months pass...

The Terminal has a lot of commercial signage in it because it is set in an AIRPORT TERMINAL, Cosmo Vitelli.

― Dr Morbius, Tuesday, 6 May 2008 20:04 (5 years ago) Permalink

I pre-ordered BOOM BLOX last night.

― El Tomboto, Tuesday, 6 May 2008 20:09 (5 years ago) Permalink

Terminal isn't bad, despite the ending.

― Gukbe, Tuesday, 6 May 2008 21:50 (5 years ago) Permalink

boom blox looks fun.

― Creeztophair, Tuesday, 6 May 2008 23:20 (5 years ago) Permalink

1 year passes...

http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/05/19/steven-spielberg-to-produce-martin-luther-king-biopic/

DreamWorks has acquired the rights to make a feature film based on the life of civil rights leader Martin Luther King.

“In trying to tackle such an ambitious project, the question we had to ask ourselves is, ‘Why now?’ ” DreamWorks CEO and co-chairman Stacey Snider told Variety . “The answer lies in MLK’s own words: ‘All progress is precarious.’ With every step forward, new obstacles emerge and we must never forget that his life and his teachings continue to challenge us every day to stand up to hatred and inequality.”

I could write about the history of MLK, but if you don’t already know this story, than you should probably be educating yourself instead of reading a film blog. I’ll be very interested to see who is hired to write and direct this biopic. It would be very easy to create an on the nose and preachy film about King. Personally, I would like to see the story that isn’t in the history books, a more personal take on King’s life story.

Who should direct? Nothing has been decided yet, but it has been a life long dream of Steven Spielberg to make a film based on King. Spielberg will produce with Suzanne de Passe and Madison Jones.

Discuss: Who would you like to see write/direct an MLK movie?

I've never thought much of most Spielberg movies that aren't in the action-adventure genre. And from what I've read The Color Purple and Amistad were both awful, so is there reason to fear Spielberg tackling directorial duties here? I think It'll be hard for anybody to make this movie and not have it get dragged into being the most didactic, ready-to-kill-two-hours-of-class type of film.

― Cunga, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 15:58 (4 years ago) Permalink

This is going to suck.

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 16:01 (4 years ago) Permalink

maybe they can give MLK a cocky son played by shia leboeuf

― rip dom passantino 3/5/09 never forget (max), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 16:08 (4 years ago) Permalink

too bad he doesn't make "rad" shit like Star Trek.

― Dr Morbius, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 16:10 (4 years ago) Permalink

do not want

― High in Openness (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 16:10 (4 years ago) Permalink

maybe they can give MLK a cocky son played by shia leboeuf

Oh c'mon, you'd enjoy seeing a Will Smith-starring MLK biopic that opens over the 4th of July weekend, wouldn't you?

― Cunga, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 16:20 (4 years ago) Permalink

I have never enjoyed a Will Smith movie ever so no

― High in Openness (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 16:24 (4 years ago) Permalink

"too bad he doesn't make "rad" shit like Star Trek."

Even if he made the greatest movies in the world, he still shouldn't be making this movie.

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 16:25 (4 years ago) Permalink

And from what I've read

Alex's posts?

None of Spielberg's three masterpieces as a director are action-adventure.

― Dr Morbius, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 16:25 (4 years ago) Permalink

yeah Jaws is a horror movie

― High in Openness (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 16:26 (4 years ago) Permalink

and always is a romance

― s1ocki, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 16:27 (4 years ago) Permalink

Cunga, you do know that DreamWorks /= A Steven Spielberg Film, right?

― Dr Morbius, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 16:30 (4 years ago) Permalink

and Hook is a travesty.

― Bud Huxtable (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 16:30 (4 years ago) Permalink

would live to see jj abrams' take on this tho

― s1ocki, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 16:31 (4 years ago) Permalink

Amistad isn't awful, actually: perfectly respectable middlebrow Oscar-style drama.

― Bud Huxtable (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 16:32 (4 years ago) Permalink

"Cunga, you do know that DreamWorks /= A Steven Spielberg Film, right?"

Uh he's producing the thing and it was his LIFE long dream to do so. So yeah it's kinda his film no matter what hack they get to helm this.

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 16:33 (4 years ago) Permalink

Judd Apatow's MLK

― velko, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 16:33 (4 years ago) Permalink

Perfectly respectable middlebrow Oscar-style dramas are awful, but hey to each their own.

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 16:36 (4 years ago) Permalink

yeah after the Hours I wanted to stab my eyes out

― High in Openness (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 16:37 (4 years ago) Permalink

Some are less awful.

― Bud Huxtable (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 16:39 (4 years ago) Permalink

Compared to the fifteen minutes of Million Dollar Baby I watched, Amistad seems positively brilliant, it's true.

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 16:41 (4 years ago) Permalink

lolz

― Tennis Bum (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 16:41 (4 years ago) Permalink

k guyz can we just agree to all hate every film ever and move on?

― homage is parody gone sour (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 16:41 (4 years ago) Permalink

the hours book was so bad, can't believe people actually watched the movie

― Mr. Que, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 16:42 (4 years ago) Permalink

Virginia Woolf's real nose is so bad, I can't believe Nicole Kidman actually went through the trouble of wearing a fake one.

― Bud Huxtable (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 16:43 (4 years ago) Permalink

actually last i heard baz luhrman had signed on to do the MLK pic

― amateurist, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 16:45 (4 years ago) Permalink

AVPVMLK

― homage is parody gone sour (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 16:48 (4 years ago) Permalink

None of Spielberg's three masterpieces as a director are action-adventure.

"I've never thought much of most Spielberg movies that aren't in the action-adventure genre."

Judd Apatow's MLK

Tim Meadows is...

― Cunga, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 16:51 (4 years ago) Permalink

it was his LIFE long dream to do so

u heard of PR

― Dr Morbius, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 17:03 (4 years ago) Permalink

gus vant sant's MLK

― blair underwood: "man up" (omar little), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 17:04 (4 years ago) Permalink

It was his LIFE long dream right after his LIFE long dream to make the Holocaust flick.

― homage is parody gone sour (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 17:08 (4 years ago) Permalink

"u heard of PR"

Big Project Runway fan, yeah.

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 17:10 (4 years ago) Permalink

And his LIFE long dream to film a slow-motion sequence of Eric Bana fucking.

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 17:11 (4 years ago) Permalink

Then in 1983, Spielberg fulfilled a life-long dream by producing a big-screen adaptation of The Twilight Zone.

With the inclusion of star Sean Connery, Spielberg vicariously fulfilled a lifelong dream to make a James Bond movie.

― blair underwood: "man up" (omar little), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 17:13 (4 years ago) Permalink

hahaah

― s1ocki, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 17:13 (4 years ago) Permalink

Finally, after decades of talks, negotiations, rows and reconciliations, the copyright holders of Tintin have struck a deal with Steven Spielberg and his DreamWorks studios. Finally, Spielberg’s lifelong dream will come true.

― s1ocki, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 17:14 (4 years ago) Permalink

Would totally dig a Tintin adaptation.

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 17:16 (4 years ago) Permalink

When the P.A. returned from his run, Spielberg fulfilled his lifelong dream of having an iced soy chai latte

― blair underwood: "man up" (omar little), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 17:17 (4 years ago) Permalink

Steven Spielberg's been workin' on the railroad all the lifelong day

― straight fire beautiful hongro (some dude), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 17:20 (4 years ago) Permalink

he HAS done more for America than Obama, at least.

uh Alex, Tintin is his & Peter Jackson's Christmas present to you.

― Dr Morbius, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 17:55 (4 years ago) Permalink

are we really doing spielberg vs. obama here.

i mean, really?

― s1ocki, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 17:56 (4 years ago) Permalink

JOEKS

EVERYTHING'S A JOEK

LIKE YOU GUYS PRETENDING "MUNICH" & "EMPIRE OF THE SUN" NEVER HAPPENED

― Dr Morbius, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 17:58 (4 years ago) Permalink

Dr Morbius is actually the screen name for that kid who dropped out of high school and watched movies with his dad instead, right?

― "the whale saw her" (gabbneb), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 17:58 (4 years ago) Permalink

http://www.broadvalleyorchard.com/?p=63

― blair underwood: "man up" (omar little), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 18:01 (4 years ago) Permalink

Empire of the Sun is pretty good, but mostly ruined by Williams' oppressive score.
― Shakey Mo Collier, Wednesday, July 27, 2005 11:21 PM

seriously, Williams completely fucked up this movie

― Tennis Bum (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 18:04 (4 years ago) Permalink

still Bale's best performance.

― Bud Huxtable (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 18:05 (4 years ago) Permalink

lots of good in munich

― The Devil's Avocado (Gukbe), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 18:05 (4 years ago) Permalink

And his LIFE long dream to film a slow-motion sequence of Eric Bana fucking.

Is that such an odd dream to have?

― neu hollywood (Eric H.), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 18:08 (4 years ago) Permalink

"Oy ownly weeyp fowr Jewish blud, chaps"

― Philip Nunez, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 18:10 (4 years ago) Permalink

"Hi terrorist, convenient that we are sharing the same safehouse, it has allowed me to see that you and I are perhaps not so different, we both love our countries but are doing morally dubious things to support them, DO YOU SEE? DO YOU SEEEEEEEEE?"

― languid samuel l. jackson (jim), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 18:21 (4 years ago) Permalink

I think Zohan was a more thought provoking study of the Israel/Palestine conflict.

― languid samuel l. jackson (jim), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 18:22 (4 years ago) Permalink

"Is that such an odd dream to have?"

No. But it's odd to insert it into Munich.

"uh Alex, Tintin is his & Peter Jackson's Christmas present to you."

Is Jackson directing it? Until I see a preview these things don't exist for me cuz I don't read industry rags.

"LIKE YOU GUYS PRETENDING "MUNICH" & "EMPIRE OF THE SUN" NEVER HAPPENED"

I try to pretend the former never happened all the time. The latter has its moments though.

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 18:24 (4 years ago) Permalink

I have never enjoyed a Will Smith movie ever so no

― High in Openness (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, May 19, 2009 12:24 PM (2 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

on a thread full of wrong u took the cake right here

― rip dom passantino 3/5/09 never forget (max), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 18:27 (4 years ago) Permalink

id like to see jan de bont's MLK

― rip dom passantino 3/5/09 never forget (max), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 18:27 (4 years ago) Permalink

on a thread full of wrong u took the cake right here

I would eat all this will smith-free cake

― Tennis Bum (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 18:28 (4 years ago) Permalink

like there's a bomb wired to mlk that will go off if he stops making a speech

― blair underwood: "man up" (omar little), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 18:28 (4 years ago) Permalink

shakey mo collier

― rip dom passantino 3/5/09 never forget (max), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 18:29 (4 years ago) Permalink

1995 Bad Boys Detective Mike Lowrey 2,000,000
1996 Independence Day Captain Steven "Steve" Hiller, USMC 5,000,000
1997 Men in Black James Darrell Edwards / Agent J 5,000,000
1998 Enemy of the State Robert Clayton Dean 14,000,000

^^ imo this is a completely unfuckwitable run

― rip dom passantino 3/5/09 never forget (max), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 18:31 (4 years ago) Permalink

i mean hes only made two good movies since but

― rip dom passantino 3/5/09 never forget (max), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 18:31 (4 years ago) Permalink

id pay to see michael bay's MLK too tbh

― rip dom passantino 3/5/09 never forget (max), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 18:32 (4 years ago) Permalink

"^^ imo this is a completely unfuckwitable run"

Yeah if you have the attention span of a gnat.

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 18:33 (4 years ago) Permalink

</>Morbius

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 18:33 (4 years ago) Permalink

i dont follow

― rip dom passantino 3/5/09 never forget (max), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 18:33 (4 years ago) Permalink

Focus.

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 18:35 (4 years ago) Permalink

Is Will Smith a Scientologist? Scientologists + Spielberg tend to be a dubious mix.

― Philip Nunez, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 18:37 (4 years ago) Permalink

Is Will Smith even attached to this? It's hard to imagine him as King frankly.

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 18:41 (4 years ago) Permalink

C. Thomas Howell needs work, right?

― Bud Huxtable (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 18:42 (4 years ago) Permalink

it's gonna be a series of actors for different parts of the story, really unique & powerful choice imo

― Swat Valley High (goole), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 18:43 (4 years ago) Permalink

im particularly excited for the jim-carrey-as-young-mlk segment

― rip dom passantino 3/5/09 never forget (max), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 18:44 (4 years ago) Permalink

I hope Dakota Fanning is one of them.

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 18:44 (4 years ago) Permalink

Dakota Fanning as teenage MLK I hope

arrgh fuck you x-post!

― Tennis Bum (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 18:45 (4 years ago) Permalink

lolz great minds think alike

― Tennis Bum (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 18:45 (4 years ago) Permalink

I'm ashamed it took me this long to realize that pretty much everyone on ILX exaggerates their hatred of Spielberg in a sort of equal-but-opposite fashion.

― neu hollywood (Eric H.), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 19:28 (4 years ago) Permalink

I'm ashamed it took me this long to realize that pretty much everyone on ILX exaggerates their hatred of Spielberg in a sort of ~~equal-but-opposite fashion~~ let's-pick-on-Morbius way.

― Bud Huxtable (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 19:34 (4 years ago) Permalink

dr.morbius has done more for america than all of ilx

― velko, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 19:35 (4 years ago) Permalink

I'm ashamed it took me this long to realize that pretty much everyone on ILX exaggerates their hatred of Spielberg in a sort of equal-but-opposite fashion.

― neu hollywood (Eric H.), Tuesday, May 19, 2009 3:28 PM (5 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

i think most people do this -- at times it feels awfully deserved

― Surmounter, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 19:35 (4 years ago) Permalink

(most ppl i know anyway)

― Surmounter, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 19:36 (4 years ago) Permalink

Whatever makes Spielberg seem controversial and vital is all good imo.

― neu hollywood (Eric H.), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 19:47 (4 years ago) Permalink

i always say i like spielberg!

― s1ocki, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 19:56 (4 years ago) Permalink

i a.i. say i like spielberg!

― neu hollywood (Eric H.), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 20:00 (4 years ago) Permalink

i indiana jones for spielberg movies.

― s1ocki, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 20:01 (4 years ago) Permalink

It's remarkable how well he's done considering a main theme is I wanna fuck my Mom

― i, grey, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 20:18 (4 years ago) Permalink

i mean hes only made two good movies since but

wtf is the 2nd one????

― Lamp, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 20:30 (4 years ago) Permalink

It's remarkable how well he's done considering a main theme is I wanna fuck my Mom

― i, grey, Tuesday, May 19, 2009 8:18 PM (11 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

worked for sophocles

― s1ocki, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 20:31 (4 years ago) Permalink

ILX really hated Hitchcock in 1965

― Dr Morbius, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 20:46 (4 years ago) Permalink

well he'd just made marnie, which was a very divisive picture

― blair underwood: "man up" (omar little), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 20:48 (4 years ago) Permalink

i'm sure S.S. will make something really fluffy w/ Julia Roberts & Steve Martin if only Surmounter asks him.

― Dr Morbius, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 20:50 (4 years ago) Permalink

"ILX really hated Hitchcock in 1965"

Yeah they're really similar directors except for Stephen Spielberg consistently sucking and Hitchcock being consistently great.

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 20:55 (4 years ago) Permalink

i'm sure S.S. will make something really fluffy w/ Julia Roberts & Steve Martin if only Surmounter asks him.

that would be too unpretentious

― "the whale saw her" (gabbneb), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:04 (4 years ago) Permalink

i mean hes only made two good movies since but

wtf is the 2nd one????

― Lamp, Tuesday, May 19, 2009 4:30 PM (38 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

i am legend

― rip dom passantino 3/5/09 never forget (max), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:08 (4 years ago) Permalink

wtf is the 1st one?

― neu hollywood (Eric H.), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:09 (4 years ago) Permalink

bad boys 2

― rip dom passantino 3/5/09 never forget (max), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:10 (4 years ago) Permalink

: /

― blair underwood: "man up" (omar little), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:11 (4 years ago) Permalink

lol i tht u were going 2 say hitch

xp really?

― Lamp, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:12 (4 years ago) Permalink

Yeah they're really similar directors except for Stephen Spielberg consistently sucking and Hitchcock being consistently great

Nice poll idea. I can think of at least 10 Hitchcock films that totally suck, though.

― Bud Huxtable (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:12 (4 years ago) Permalink

More talk of sucking and cock plz.

― neu hollywood (Eric H.), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:13 (4 years ago) Permalink

haha no i pulled "two" out of my ass and then just named the first 2 i could remember

― rip dom passantino 3/5/09 never forget (max), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:13 (4 years ago) Permalink

aka i did what ive been doing on ILX for 3 years now

― rip dom passantino 3/5/09 never forget (max), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:14 (4 years ago) Permalink

Part of being a commercial filmmaker is that you're going to mistake the public mood and make terrible movies on occasion. I don't hold Spielberg or Hitchcock's failures against them.

― Bud Huxtable (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:15 (4 years ago) Permalink

bad boys 2 is pretty good if not the masterpiece that some other ilc mod claims but yah

u know whats a good movie is minority report

― Lamp, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:15 (4 years ago) Permalink

mistaking the public mood seems to be an excuse for a film that flops rather than a bad film

― blair underwood: "man up" (omar little), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:17 (4 years ago) Permalink

It's both too.

― Bud Huxtable (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:18 (4 years ago) Permalink

how would it result in a bad film?

― blair underwood: "man up" (omar little), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:18 (4 years ago) Permalink

minority report is good but has a kind of dum ending

― rip dom passantino 3/5/09 never forget (max), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:20 (4 years ago) Permalink

"Nice poll idea. I can think of at least 10 Hitchcock films that totally suck, though."

Guy made like 50 though. He's entitled to a few stinkers. 10 seems high though.

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:21 (4 years ago) Permalink

There's plenty of bad films that flop!

― Bud Huxtable (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:21 (4 years ago) Permalink

Hitch's: Torn Curtain, Topaz -- bad films and totally out of step with their respective release year's big films.

― Bud Huxtable (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:22 (4 years ago) Permalink

Okay that's two.

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:23 (4 years ago) Permalink

He made nearly 20 movies before arriving at the original Man Who Knew Too Much and The 39 Steps, and most of them are no Rear Windows.

― neu hollywood (Eric H.), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:23 (4 years ago) Permalink

i guess what i'm asking is why a film that misreads a commercial audience would = a bad film, unless you're saying certain hackish tendencies of both filmmakers (in angling for box office) ruin the film

― blair underwood: "man up" (omar little), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:23 (4 years ago) Permalink

I never suggested a causal relationship, and sorry if I didn't make myself clear.

― Bud Huxtable (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:26 (4 years ago) Permalink

xxp Sure sure and a lot of them are really dated, but sucks still seems harsh. There are some early gems there too.

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:27 (4 years ago) Permalink

i forgive you. this time!

― blair underwood: "man up" (omar little), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:27 (4 years ago) Permalink

sucks still seems harsh

Unless you're talking about Spielberg, natch.

― neu hollywood (Eric H.), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:38 (4 years ago) Permalink

even tho i love Marnie, i still think it kind of sucks

― Surmounter, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:40 (4 years ago) Permalink

Nothing is too harsh when applied to Spielberg.

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:40 (4 years ago) Permalink

Marnie and Torn Curtain goofy, but entertaining enough to avoid being completely useless. Topaz and Family Plot suck. I've not seen all (or even most of) the pre-39 Steps flicks, but I recall Blackmail and Sabotage being worthwhile.

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:44 (4 years ago) Permalink

Add Jamaica Inn, The Paradine Case, Rope, I Confess, The Wrong Man to the suck list.

― Bud Huxtable (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:44 (4 years ago) Permalink

I'm sure most of the silent films are pretty lame, but they are silent films so I have little expectation of greatness. It seems lame to count that against him.

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:45 (4 years ago) Permalink

I haven't seen Jamaica Inn, but the other four are all very watchable.

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:46 (4 years ago) Permalink

they are silent films so I have little expectation of greatness.

― Bud Huxtable (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:48 (4 years ago) Permalink

Um, subtract The Wrong Man and I Confess from the suck list.

Also, Spielberg.

― neu hollywood (Eric H.), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:51 (4 years ago) Permalink

Anyway I'm sure I've said this on other threads, but the main reason I dislike Spielberg so much is that he takes film subjects I'm ostensibly interested in and then proceeds to make movies I find immensely disappointing. If he just stuck to making crap I didn't care about at all, I might not be so harsh.

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:55 (4 years ago) Permalink

I understand your pain, being that there is a filmmaker in my life called Ang Lee.

― neu hollywood (Eric H.), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:57 (4 years ago) Permalink

Yeah he's another one who irritates me to no end.

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 22:00 (4 years ago) Permalink

Eastwood too.

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 22:00 (4 years ago) Permalink

ugh Ang Lee, I feel you on that one

― Tennis Bum (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 22:02 (4 years ago) Permalink

Eastwood at least made some pretty great stuff pre-90s (none of which he directed, of course)

― Tennis Bum (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 22:03 (4 years ago) Permalink

high plains drifter

― blair underwood: "man up" (omar little), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 22:03 (4 years ago) Permalink

Yeah I'm talking about as a director.

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 22:04 (4 years ago) Permalink

"minority report is good but has a kind of dum ending"

wha? this movie is not a movie; it is bad AT&T informercial about the future. In the future, your cereal will talk to you and The Gap will figure out what you want to wear before you do.

In its defense, the book ending is courageously bad, in that it would take amazing hero balls to film as written.

― Philip Nunez, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 22:42 (4 years ago) Permalink

I never saw that Gary Sinise Imposter movie. Is it as crappy as it looked?

― Alex in SF, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 22:45 (4 years ago) Permalink

This thread went to shit in the last seven posts.

― Bud Huxtable (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 22:48 (4 years ago) Permalink

Eric, I Confess?!? Hitch takes his cue from Monty Clift's somnolent performance.

― Bud Huxtable (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 19 May 2009 22:48 (4 years ago) Permalink

minority report is good but has a kind of dum ending

― rip dom passantino 3/5/09 never forget (max), Tuesday, May 19, 2009 9:20 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark

pretty much every Spielberg film of the last decade has a kind of dum ending.

many xposts - eyes rolled at Munich discussions on palestine/israel, but the assassinations were great and full of tension. plus after recently seeing the Baader Mienhof Complex, Munich is looking pretty good. Thought the ending was too much, but Zoller Seitz's Benjamin Button/Eric Roth video essay makes me want to see it again.

the short version of recent Spielberg: they all look amazing save Crystal Skull, which is pretty poorly directed imo, some are a lot of fun, most way overreach thematically.

― The Devil's Avocado (Gukbe), Wednesday, 20 May 2009 05:49 (4 years ago) Permalink

i guess what i'm asking is why a film that misreads a commercial audience would = a bad film

you know it's ILX, right?

they are silent films so I have little expectation of greatness.

wau, confession of philistinism is new territory.

― Dr Morbius, Wednesday, 20 May 2009 13:31 (4 years ago) Permalink

"wau, confession of philistinism is new territory."

There are plenty of great silent films, but there are even more that are frankly completely dated and nearly impossible to watch. If that makes me a philistine then so be it.

― Alex in SF, Wednesday, 20 May 2009 16:54 (4 years ago) Permalink

minority report has an entirely indefensible last third or so. just atrocious. and the much-vaunted "futurism" in it is just ridiculous. like in the future we'll move around a megabyte or so of data on giant panes of glass.

― s1ocki, Wednesday, 20 May 2009 17:16 (4 years ago) Permalink

The Roth Creative Screenwriting Podcast interview about Benjamin Button spends a few minutes talking about Munich. Alludes but never really gets into the tention between Roth (hawkish, proud Jew, "I get the humanitarian thing") and Spielberg, who apparently felt this duty as the most famous Jew in the world or something to do it right.

http://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?i=50365436&id=77837603

― caek, Wednesday, 20 May 2009 17:20 (4 years ago) Permalink

There are plenty of great ~~silent~~ films, but there are even more that are frankly completely dated and nearly impossible to watch.

― Bud Huxtable (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 20 May 2009 17:21 (4 years ago) Permalink

i just cant figure out eric roth. love the insider, big munich fan, but "forrest gump" and "benjamin button" are such terrible, terrible scripts.

― s1ocki, Wednesday, 20 May 2009 17:22 (4 years ago) Permalink

Sometimes it's good for your career to make a ton of money and get Oscar noms, and FG accomplished that goal.

― Your heartbeat soun like sasquatch feet (polyphonic), Wednesday, 20 May 2009 17:24 (4 years ago) Permalink

Also made me hate his guts forever which is good for him too as a hawkish, proud jew who gets the "humanitarian" thing. What a fuckhead.

― Alex in SF, Wednesday, 20 May 2009 17:32 (4 years ago) Permalink

Sometimes it's good for your career to make a ton of money and get Oscar noms, and FG accomplished that goal.

― Your heartbeat soun like sasquatch feet (polyphonic), Wednesday, May 20, 2009 5:24 PM (15 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

...

― s1ocki, Wednesday, 20 May 2009 17:40 (4 years ago) Permalink

What?

― Your heartbeat soun like sasquatch feet (polyphonic), Wednesday, 20 May 2009 17:44 (4 years ago) Permalink

Although apparently he lost all that money via Bernie Madoff so expect more FG level stuff in the future.

― Alex in SF, Wednesday, 20 May 2009 17:44 (4 years ago) Permalink

OK Alex, but your first "silent films" post didn't jibe w/ that last one.

I'm assuming most of the Munich script wound up being Kushner's, at least the dialogue.

― Dr Morbius, Thursday, 21 May 2009 04:46 (4 years ago) Permalink

2 months pass...

Up after Tintin -- a remake of Harvey.

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 3 August 2009 02:45 (3 years ago) Permalink

Recently caught minority report and thought the ending wasn't as bad as I remember it, and actually kind of interesting/challening considering what has gone on before. Kind of becomes a parody/critique of noir fatalism.

― ryan, Monday, 3 August 2009 03:27 (3 years ago) Permalink

4 months pass...

he has "departed" the Harvey remake:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0988045/news#ni1264203

― Feingold/Kaptur 2012 (Dr Morbius), Saturday, 5 December 2009 14:27 (3 years ago) Permalink

Now Steven Spielberg has abandoned plans for his next career-defining film to involve the exploits of a six-foot-tall imaginary rabbit.

'Career defining'? Really?

I enjoy or love most of the Spielberg films I've seen. The only ones I can think of that left me kinda 'meh' are Jurassic Park and War Of The Worlds. But at least they were both pretty to look at, and WOTW had a pretty awesome first 30-45 minutes.

Now I'm feeling inspired to go dive into my unwatched copies of 1941 and Amistad...and probably find a couple more Spielberg movies to feel 'meh' about in the process.

― Pooping And Crying (Deric W. Haircare), Saturday, 5 December 2009 16:44 (3 years ago) Permalink

I think Empire of the Sun may be his best 'grown up' film.

― Communi-Bear Silo State (chap), Saturday, 5 December 2009 16:51 (3 years ago) Permalink

Now I'm feeling inspired to go dive into my unwatched copies of 1941

I wouldn't do that to yrself.

― SBanned of Brothers (Noodle Vague), Saturday, 5 December 2009 17:00 (3 years ago) Permalink

I'm super fascinated to see how badly he could've possibly stumbled in the midst of such an classic streak (Sugarland, Jaws, and Close Encounters on one side and Raiders and E.T. on the other). In the midst of watching Doumanian-era SNL (which isn't nearly as bad as I'd been led to believe), I'm reminded that accepted wisdom of epic failure isn't always the whole story.

― Pooping And Crying (Deric W. Haircare), Saturday, 5 December 2009 18:01 (3 years ago) Permalink

Don't think he's much cop as a comedy director but from what I remember the script leaves quite a lot to be desired.

― SBanned of Brothers (Noodle Vague), Saturday, 5 December 2009 18:03 (3 years ago) Permalink

I don't let that fact affect my enjoyment of Close Encounters (which I realized, finally, that you pretty much have to accept as a fairy tale or fable, as it completely falls apart when any logic is applied to the story).

― Pooping And Crying (Deric W. Haircare), Saturday, 5 December 2009 18:11 (3 years ago) Permalink

thank god he saw the light on the harvey thing

― mod only knows who i'd ban without u (s1ocki), Saturday, 5 December 2009 18:13 (3 years ago) Permalink

I don't let that fact affect my enjoyment of Close Encounters (which I realized, finally, that you pretty much have to accept as a fairy tale or fable, as it completely falls apart when any logic is applied to the story).

― Pooping And Crying (Deric W. Haircare), Saturday, December 5, 2009 1:11 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

a lot of good movies are like this tbh

― mod only knows who i'd ban without u (s1ocki), Saturday, 5 December 2009 18:13 (3 years ago) Permalink

I'm super fascinated to see how badly he could've possibly stumbled in the midst of such an classic streak

Great directors stumble and deteriorate all the time!

― Hell is other people. In an ILE film forum. (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Saturday, 5 December 2009 18:16 (3 years ago) Permalink

Not trying to dissuade you, just thinking out loud really. I don't think he's directed an actual comedy movie since 1941 and I wonder if that's because of the way that film turned out or if he just doesn't like the genre or what.

― SBanned of Brothers (Noodle Vague), Saturday, 5 December 2009 18:17 (3 years ago) Permalink

1941 has its fans. Still haven't seen it.

― really senile old crap shit (Eric H.), Saturday, 5 December 2009 18:41 (3 years ago) Permalink

as it completely falls apart when any logic is applied to the story

Hitchcock called such critics The Plausibles!

I enjoyed 1941 as spectacle rather than comedy. (Robert Stack is really good tho.)

― Feingold/Kaptur 2012 (Dr Morbius), Saturday, 5 December 2009 20:27 (3 years ago) Permalink

2 months pass...

A.I. = so frustrating. Saw it again tonight.

Still, what a decade. I don't love any of them through and through, but Hitchcock would've been proud of A.I., Catch Me If You Can, The Terminal, War of the Worlds and Munich. Can't believe he threw A.I. at a cineplex audience.

Most of ILX hates Spielberg cuz most of his eighties and nineties movies are CRAP. Those decades were the apprenticeship for this one.

― Inculcate a spirit of serfdom in children (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, 22 February 2010 00:08 (3 years ago) Permalink

Most of ILX hates Spielberg cuz most of his eighties and nineties movies are CRAP

Sort of an odd argument to make, considering ILX (and the rest of the world) seems to be basically cool with Duel, Jaws, Close Encounters, Raiders and E.T. It's just the last 15 years' worth that's been received all splitsville.

― queen frostine (Eric H.), Monday, 22 February 2010 00:18 (3 years ago) Permalink

And I say that as someone who's ~~drinking~~ mixing the KoolAid on most of those '00s movies you mention.

― queen frostine (Eric H.), Monday, 22 February 2010 00:19 (3 years ago) Permalink

Those two eighties movies omit a lot of nonsense.

― Inculcate a spirit of serfdom in children (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, 22 February 2010 00:23 (3 years ago) Permalink

*mentioning those films, that is

― Inculcate a spirit of serfdom in children (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, 22 February 2010 00:23 (3 years ago) Permalink

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 22 February 2010 00:23 (3 years ago) Permalink

"It's just the last 15 years' worth that's been received all splitsville."

Nah he's been splitsville since the Color Purple at least. Maybe even E.T.

― Fig On A Plate Cart (Alex in SF), Monday, 22 February 2010 00:25 (3 years ago) Permalink

I like the little 'introducing Brad Johnson' tucked away down in the actual credits of that poster because after that he rode the rocket sled to anonymous working actor nonfame.

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 22 February 2010 00:26 (3 years ago) Permalink

Sure. Point being, the only movies I think you'd find predominately universal acclaim among just about any sample group are the movies that fell within his first decade.

― queen frostine (Eric H.), Monday, 22 February 2010 00:30 (3 years ago) Permalink

i.e. most of ILX thinks Spielberg is crap because of, among other things, HIS '00s FILMS!

― queen frostine (Eric H.), Monday, 22 February 2010 00:31 (3 years ago) Permalink

WoW was awes also MR was a gr8 ad 4 everything, kinda hate SS tho

― plaxico (I know, right?), Monday, 22 February 2010 00:35 (3 years ago) Permalink

yeah, E.T. was received "splitsville." Record-setting box office, Oscar nominations, one of the most beloved films of its era, etc. Alex forgot to add "by me."

― Fusty Moralizer (Dr Morbius), Monday, 22 February 2010 01:59 (3 years ago) Permalink

Record-setting box office, Oscar nominations

if you like E.T., you'll love Avatar

― i know who the sockpuppet master of ilx is (velko), Monday, 22 February 2010 04:24 (3 years ago) Permalink

9 months pass...

Ambitious:

http://www.spielbergblogathon.blogspot.com/

― kind of shrill and very self-righteous (Dr Morbius), Sunday, 19 December 2010 08:21 (2 years ago) Permalink

bless those kids

― Gukbe, Sunday, 19 December 2010 08:42 (2 years ago) Permalink

1 year passes...

what's up w/ this dude that the hyper-detailed mise en scene of mass destruction of war of the worlds or parts of war horse can be so authentically horrifying, but the sentimentality of those films' final acts can be staged and shot in such a risibly phoney way? shouldn't this guy have been a horror director?

― flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Friday, 17 February 2012 12:39 (1 year ago) Permalink

didn't find either risibly phony, but u know, we've argued this for 8 years. If anything ppl are complaining about the violence of WH being reined in to keep it family-appropriate. (The scene of the brothers' execution in front of the windmill is pure, poetic Hollywood imagemaking in the classical style.)

Kaminski said the orange skies at the end of WH were real (I know this likely isn't what you're principally addressing).

― Literal Facepalms (Dr Morbius), Friday, 17 February 2012 12:57 (1 year ago) Permalink

Haven't seen War Horse, but I understand visually (at least) it's a conscious throw-back hybrid. War of the Worlds is just a clumsy script that didn't put nearly enough effort into the people as it did the action sequences. Here I invoke an interview I did with David Koepp, where (off the record) he nonetheless still diplomatically implied some of the worst things about Lost World (gymkata girl) were ideas imposed on his script by corporate committee. Spielberg has lately been pretty unabashed about Lucas's crap "Crystal Skull" script, basically being a good sport, saying "hey, it was his story." Don't know if that's a defense or anything, but I think Spielberg knows when to hold 'em and knows when to fold 'em, essentially.

― Josh in Chicago, Friday, 17 February 2012 14:10 (1 year ago) Permalink

i just found the staging of the reunions in WotW and WH to be impossibly stilted and phoney, almost ludicrously so. i don't get the feeling that spielberg feels it; he can't imagine a convincing, much less an unexpected, way to stage this sort of thing. yet many of his scenes of utter horror are admirably inventive and effective.

but opinions are opinions.

― flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Friday, 17 February 2012 15:13 (1 year ago) Permalink

also i don't know that we've argued about spielberg before, at least not that much. i don't have very strong opinions on the guy in general.

― flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Friday, 17 February 2012 15:19 (1 year ago) Permalink

I meant the communal "we," hehe.

In the case of War of the Worlds character is action to a large degree; 90% of it worked for me, and i am inclined to fuckin' hate Tom Cruise.

― Literal Facepalms (Dr Morbius), Friday, 17 February 2012 15:22 (1 year ago) Permalink

i don't get the feeling that spielberg feels it; he can't imagine a convincing, much less an unexpected, way to stage this sort of thing. yet many of his scenes of utter horror are admirably inventive and effective.

been over this 100x on ILX but this nails exactly what's so suggestive about the final scenes of A.I. imo.

but I dunno I find the standard Spielberg "happy ending" kind of a mannerist affectation of his at this point...there's something strictly formal, i guess you could say, about its function in the narrative.

― ryan, Friday, 17 February 2012 15:45 (1 year ago) Permalink

especially in the sense that they almost seem detachable from the movie proper.

― ryan, Friday, 17 February 2012 15:56 (1 year ago) Permalink

well, in the case of War Horse, a reconciliation/happy ending is part of what he's adapting, it's a children's book!

― Literal Facepalms (Dr Morbius), Friday, 17 February 2012 16:02 (1 year ago) Permalink

i feel like spielberg has the ability to infuse anything he does with a shitload of movie magic for lack of a better term, and sometimes its astounding and sometimes its a huge disaster (Always), usually if the material's too thin or bad to be redeemed. the reunion at the end of WotW is just dumb to me, but in WH i thought it worked. and i think the staging in WH's final scenes are just better and more interesting; in war of the worlds its risibly phony but in war horse it feels more like hes going for some heightened non-reality 'fable' - and i guess your reaction to that could be dependent on how skeptical you are of modern fables

i really liked War Horse

― RudolfHitlerFtw (Hungry4Ass), Friday, 17 February 2012 16:08 (1 year ago) Permalink

I just don't get the utility of phrases like "heightened non-reality" re Hollywood studio-made films (and many others made elsewhere)... this is what all but *maybe* 2 of his films are. That's what Hitchcock films were. When mainstream filmmakers decided to be "gritty" between the '50s and '70s, they made up a new heightened-reality version of naturalism! (stealing that last point from Stephin Merritt I think)

― Literal Facepalms (Dr Morbius), Friday, 17 February 2012 16:13 (1 year ago) Permalink

that's why to me Cassavettes films look more like Storybook Land than a Selznick production.

― Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 17 February 2012 16:17 (1 year ago) Permalink

i don't really know where you're coming from morbs! i would agree that many filmmakers are working in a heightened reality idiom, even those whose work is characterized as naturalistic, but im just talking about this specific movie. i didn't mean it critically, just that the ending of war horse seems conspicuously different from anything else you see in movies today - the composition (which struck me as Ford-like, not that im an expert), use of color, music - in a way that evokes the movies of SS's childhood

― RudolfHitlerFtw (Hungry4Ass), Friday, 17 February 2012 16:57 (1 year ago) Permalink

Yeah, when the material calls for it (ie not in Munich), he mines that vein expertly (tho WH is only a semi-success for me).

― Literal Facepalms (Dr Morbius), Friday, 17 February 2012 17:23 (1 year ago) Permalink

that's why to me Cassavettes films look more like Storybook Land than a Selznick production.

― Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, February 17, 2012 10:17 AM (3 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

wha--? this applies more to, like, jules dassin than cassavetes.

― flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Friday, 17 February 2012 19:41 (1 year ago) Permalink

yeah the ending of war horse was seriously mega-stylized (no less than the much more interesting climactic scene of haywire) -- i don't see how you can argue against that.

― flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Friday, 17 February 2012 19:42 (1 year ago) Permalink

what would a not-stylized ending look like?

The boy and horse going home is more a coda -- the 'endings' seem more like the two scenes before that.

― Literal Facepalms (Dr Morbius), Friday, 17 February 2012 20:08 (1 year ago) Permalink

So is the "ending" the " ... and zee horse" part?

― dead-trius (Eric H.), Friday, 17 February 2012 20:14 (1 year ago) Permalink

much more interesting climactic scene of haywire

challops!

― RudolfHitlerFtw (Hungry4Ass), Friday, 17 February 2012 20:16 (1 year ago) Permalink

Is that French granddad? I saw it 2-1/2 months ago, 98% of it is gone.

― Literal Facepalms (Dr Morbius), Friday, 17 February 2012 20:16 (1 year ago) Permalink

Yeah, it's the 2 seconds of suspense about whether the horse and the boy will actually end up being allowed to stay together.

― dead-trius (Eric H.), Friday, 17 February 2012 20:25 (1 year ago) Permalink

much more interesting climactic scene of haywire

challops!

― RudolfHitlerFtw (Hungry4Ass), Friday, February 17, 2012 2:16 PM (15 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

not really. whatever you think of haywire, the climactic scene on the beach is great.

― flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Friday, 17 February 2012 20:33 (1 year ago) Permalink

wha--? this applies more to, like, jules dassin than cassavetes.

Cassavettes' naturalism is way stylized.

― Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 17 February 2012 21:14 (1 year ago) Permalink

do you mean in the performances? because that i get, completely.

as for the mise-en-scene in other respects, i don't get it.

― flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Friday, 17 February 2012 21:15 (1 year ago) Permalink

that was the worst fight in the movie!

― RudolfHitlerFtw (Hungry4Ass), Friday, 17 February 2012 21:15 (1 year ago) Permalink

well in terms of fight choreography, maybe.

in terms of crazy editing and deliberately mismatched lighting, hell no.

― flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Friday, 17 February 2012 21:16 (1 year ago) Permalink

the shot of her running up behind mcgregor is great. the way the fight was shot really grated me, with the camera centered on like a nice sunset with the two fighters stuffed in the corner. it further depersonalized a conflict that was already thin and difficult to care about. i felt like soderbergh was throwing it in the audiences face in an unpleasant way

― RudolfHitlerFtw (Hungry4Ass), Friday, 17 February 2012 21:17 (1 year ago) Permalink

that's probably true, but i like the way that instead of trying to match the lighting they just allow the sunset light to radically shift with each cut. i thought that was kind of brilliant.

― flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Friday, 17 February 2012 21:18 (1 year ago) Permalink

there are also lots of really (deliberately i assume) jarring elliptical cuts.

― flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Friday, 17 February 2012 21:18 (1 year ago) Permalink

yeah i rarely notice editing choices like that. i'd be interested in reading an analysis of some of the things he was doing stylistically - i couldn't really tell why he made certain decisions (like how he shot that beach fight), maybe it's really obvious from a certain perspective, he seems to have like a unifying aesthetic for each movie he does

― RudolfHitlerFtw (Hungry4Ass), Friday, 17 February 2012 21:59 (1 year ago) Permalink

I'd love to see a comparison between that scene and a "standard" action scene because it certainly felt different. i remember one particular cut that shifted the POV exactly 180 degrees, which certainly seemed unusual to my eyes.

― ryan, Friday, 17 February 2012 22:05 (1 year ago) Permalink

oh, great

― Literal Facepalms (Dr Morbius), Friday, 17 February 2012 22:44 (1 year ago) Permalink

oh great people are actually talking about movies in an interesting and detailed way

― the jazz zinger (s1ocki), Friday, 17 February 2012 23:48 (1 year ago) Permalink

I just happen to like stayin on topic

― Literal Facepalms (Dr Morbius), Saturday, 18 February 2012 01:19 (1 year ago) Permalink

Classic.

― dead-trius (Eric H.), Saturday, 18 February 2012 04:37 (1 year ago) Permalink

1 month passes...

on the early TV work:

http://www.reverseshot.com/article/spielbergs_early_television_work

― Literal Facepalms (Dr Morbius), Monday, 19 March 2012 20:25 (1 year ago) Permalink

Some great essays on Spielberg, plus memorabilia and diary excerpts from Truffaut's acting stint on CE3K, in the February Cahiers.

― Lawanda Pageboy (Capitaine Jay Vee), Monday, 19 March 2012 23:02 (1 year ago) Permalink

1 month passes...

Reverse Shot continues its Spielberg coverage: http://www.reverseshot.com/section/steven_spielberg

Munich

War of the Worlds

― GoT SPOILER ALERT (Gukbe), Thursday, 26 April 2012 16:15 (1 year ago) Permalink

Tom Hiddleston sure can wear an uniform (as he proved in The Deep Blue Sea).

― Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 8 May 2012 21:20 (1 year ago) Permalink

He played one of the sharks?

― bark ruffalo (latebloomer), Tuesday, 8 May 2012 22:57 (1 year ago) Permalink

He played Samuel L. Jackson.

― Josh in Chicago, Tuesday, 8 May 2012 23:37 (1 year ago) Permalink

Goldman isn't a fan then..

http://achtenblog.blogspot.co.uk/2007/08/saving-private-ryan-goldman-essay.html

― piscesx, Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:09 (1 year ago) Permalink

ha i remember reading that in Premier. pretty OTM to be honest.

― bark ruffalo (latebloomer), Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:35 (1 year ago) Permalink

6 months pass...

Janusz Kaminski on 11 shots:

http://www.vulture.com/2012/11/how-steven-spielberg-cinematographer-janusz-kaminski-got-these-shots.html

― saltwater incursion (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 14 November 2012 18:15 (7 months ago) Permalink

Munich
"It's almost over-the-top to some degree, right?" admits Kaminski

― Bobby Ken Doll (Eric H.), Wednesday, 14 November 2012 19:19 (7 months ago) Permalink

and all the better for it.

― saltwater incursion (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 14 November 2012 19:21 (7 months ago) Permalink

What the hell. Ranked my favorite Spielbergs out in response to that Salon ranking and here's what I came up with:

01. A.I. Artificial Intelligence 2001
02. E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial 1982
03. Munich 2005
04. War of the Worlds 2005
05. Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom 1984
06. Close Encounters of the Third Kind 1977
07. Raiders of the Lost Ark 1981
08. Lincoln 2012
09. Schindler’s List 1993
10. Jurassic Park 1993
11. Minority Report 2002
12. War Horse 2011
13. Jaws 1975
14. Saving Private Ryan 1998
15. The Color Purple 1985
16. Catch Me If You Can 2002
17. The Lost World: Jurassic Park 1997
18. Amistad 1997
19. Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull 2008
20. Hook 1991
21. Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade 1989

Biggest blind spots still are Duel and Empire of the Sun.

― Bobby Ken Doll (Eric H.), Tuesday, 20 November 2012 14:41 (6 months ago) Permalink

Top 3 are always rotating, tho.

― Bobby Ken Doll (Eric H.), Tuesday, 20 November 2012 14:44 (6 months ago) Permalink

I'd place Jaws in the top ten instead of JP and our hierarchy differs but otherwise we're in perfect mind meld.

― the little prince of inane false binary hype (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 20 November 2012 14:46 (6 months ago) Permalink

our hierarchy differs

LOL, aside from that.

― Bobby Ken Doll (Eric H.), Tuesday, 20 November 2012 15:00 (6 months ago) Permalink

No love for Last Crusade then?

― I wish to incorporate disco into my small business (chap), Tuesday, 20 November 2012 15:43 (6 months ago) Permalink

The opposite, pretty much.

― Bobby Ken Doll (Eric H.), Tuesday, 20 November 2012 15:46 (6 months ago) Permalink

Tho Hook is probably admittedly likely worse.

― Bobby Ken Doll (Eric H.), Tuesday, 20 November 2012 15:46 (6 months ago) Permalink

Hook and Lost World would definitely not place in my top 20. Duel would, though. And Sugarland might squeak in at 20, just because of its look as a document of the 70s to me. I also have a soft spot for 1941, and may be the only person of whom this is true.

― super perv powder (Phil D.), Tuesday, 20 November 2012 15:49 (6 months ago) Permalink

kael's doom-is-the-best meme is the greatest trick the devil ever pulled, but jurassic park over jaws is a very very important truth.

― guys! we can keep on spending! (difficult listening hour), Tuesday, 20 November 2012 15:56 (6 months ago) Permalink

the kind of truth that's not actually true?

― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Tuesday, 20 November 2012 17:44 (6 months ago) Permalink

saving Empire of the Sun for a double bill w/ The King of Comedy, eh?

The worst thing I've seen by him is the Twilight Zone movie segment.

― saltwater incursion (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 20 November 2012 17:51 (6 months ago) Permalink

it is NOT worse than Hook or Always.

― the little prince of inane false binary hype (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 20 November 2012 17:52 (6 months ago) Permalink

all yall complaining about bad hacking scenes in skyfall need to appreciate the master of bad hacking scenes in jurassic park

― Philip Nunez, Tuesday, 20 November 2012 17:52 (6 months ago) Permalink

ive given Raiders a bunch of chances and aside from the truck chase i dont think very highly of it. i usually disagree with Kael when it comes to action flicks but she nails that one.

Jaws, ET, Munich, Schindly's, Close Encounters would be at the top of my list; Always, Lost World, Terminal at the bottom (and i can find something to like about all of those anyway)

― turds (Hungry4Ass), Tuesday, 20 November 2012 17:56 (6 months ago) Permalink

I have not seen Hook, JP2 or Always.

― saltwater incursion (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 20 November 2012 17:57 (6 months ago) Permalink

or Joan Crawford's "Night Gallery" which has gotta be better than several of the films

― saltwater incursion (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 20 November 2012 17:57 (6 months ago) Permalink

Schindly's Bulletpoints

― Bobby Ken Doll (Eric H.), Tuesday, 20 November 2012 17:57 (6 months ago) Permalink

I've seen Always, but so long ago that I can't even remember it.

― Bobby Ken Doll (Eric H.), Tuesday, 20 November 2012 17:58 (6 months ago) Permalink

always is junk but spielberg really pumps that sucker full of movie magic. the filmmaking is virtuosic but there's no restraint (Lincoln really makes you appreciate how far he's come in that respect) - so you're sorta getting his best and worst, in that you see what happens when he uses his full powers on unredeemable material. there's some great, exciting parts that you cant imagine anyone doing better, but the story just doesn't deserve it.

― turds (Hungry4Ass), Tuesday, 20 November 2012 18:10 (6 months ago) Permalink

all yall complaining about bad hacking scenes in skyfall need to appreciate the master of bad hacking scenes in jurassic park

it was the '90s

― Number None, Tuesday, 20 November 2012 19:27 (6 months ago) Permalink

1.5 years after this:

― Bobby Ken Doll (Eric H.), Tuesday, 20 November 2012 19:40 (6 months ago) Permalink

she doesn't hack anything in jurassic park she just uses a computer w an admittedly goofy GUI. like, there are no pop-ups where skulls laugh at you. it is in fact a unix system. now there IS that pop-up in an earlier scene where a cartoon of wayne knight laughs at samuel l jackson but that sets up a great slj delivery ("PLEASE!") so it's excused.

― guys! we can keep on spending! (difficult listening hour), Tuesday, 20 November 2012 21:22 (6 months ago) Permalink

The full quote is, iirc, "PLEASE! God, I hate this hacker crap!"

― Bobby Ken Doll (Eric H.), Tuesday, 20 November 2012 21:31 (6 months ago) Permalink

if spielberg makes a movie about samuel l jackson fighting kid unix hackers, all manner of sins will be excused.

― Philip Nunez, Tuesday, 20 November 2012 21:53 (6 months ago) Permalink

SLJ smoking in Jurassic Park was one of the last times we saw anyone do it (a) indoors (b) in front of children

― the little prince of inane false binary hype (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 20 November 2012 22:45 (6 months ago) Permalink

4 months pass...

debating his merits.

Tom Carson: If you compare my two pieces, it should be obvious that I think more highly of Schindler's List than I do of SPR. My problems with the former have to do with how the third act does, in my view, shunt aside the horror of mass death in favor of sentimentality about the handful of people Schindler saved. To my mind, there's an equation between that red coat and Dorothy's red ruby slippers—she's The One—and what about the thousands of children sent to the gas chambers who got stuck wearing gray that day? I'm as grateful as anyone that Anne Frank is famous because we have her testimony. But at some level, to single out an individual victim of the Holocaust is to deny the horror of its anonymity. Like, if the kid hadn't been so noticeable—and sorry, but she's as cute and tough as Shirley Temple, guiding our responses somewhat—Schindler's conscience wouldn't have been stirred?

By and large—because I do admire how Goeth is characterized, and we'll get to that—I also don't agree with you that the movie is really all that informative about the nature of anti-Semitism or how the Holocaust came to be, since a viewer without prior awareness wouldn't find much that explains either. Its power comes from re-creating the Holocaust's atrocities so intensely that you feel you're watching—or, if you're susceptible, almost experiencing—the real thing. That bothers me. We have a lot of newsreel documentation of the actual camps, and the paradox is that Spielberg's very scrupulous and horrific facsimile ends up having more authority for the audience because it's superior as filmmaking. There's something disturbing about the fake version replacing the documentary one at that level.

Matt Zoller Seitz: I don't agree. Where Spielberg excels is where narrative cinema itself excels: at helping you understand the physical, visceral experience of going through something, whether it's a mundane contemporary moment or some grand historical turning point. Where Spielberg flounders, I think, is when his films are trying to hard to put things in perspective, to put a frame around it. The strongest section of Amistad for me is that flashback to the Middle Passage, which conveys the full physical as well as moral (immoral) reality of the slave trade better than any mainstream American film or TV production ever had. The lived experience of being under fire and seeing people blown up around you is the most valuable and memorable part of Saving Private Ryan, although that film's "men on a mission" template tends to turn a story with Apocalypse Now/Dr. Strangelove absurdist aspects into something that feels, or plays, much more conventionally. The guys argue about the logic or necessity of saving this one guy, but the movie makes it clear from the very beginning that they're risking soldiers' lives for a symbolic or PR gesture. And even at the end, the film has a deceptively complex/simple way of asking if it was all worth it: it's concluding, I think, "Yes, it was worth it, in that they saved this one guy's life, and that's what you can take out of it—and maybe it's the only unambiguously positive thing to come out of it all."

But you're still aware that almost everyone else in the platoon died, and they all had lives, too, lives that were just as valuable as Ryan's.

The film is bracketed with those cemetery scenes, which are admittedly very sentimental and perhaps unnecessary from a plot standpoint, but even those aren't as straightforward as they initially read. We start and end with an image of the American flag, but it's not a robust, pristine, poster-ready image of a flag. The flag is tattered, and the sun is behind it. You see the flag, but you also see through the flag, a multi-valent image that might be—as odd as this sounds!—too subtle for the intended audience. Visually Spielberg is incredibly subtle, even when he's being loud and spectacular, but those kinds of subtleties tend to get lost in the din.

http://blogs.indiewire.com/pressplay/steven-spielberg-hollywood-historian-a-debate-between-matt-zoller-seitz-and-tom-carson

― Pope Rusty I (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 20 March 2013 16:30 (2 months ago) Permalink

My problems with the former have to do with how the third act does, in my view, shunt aside the horror of mass death in favor of sentimentality

This is the context that makes the ending of AI so powerful and weird.

― ryan, Wednesday, 20 March 2013 16:38 (2 months ago) Permalink

I hope you're not saying that ending is sentimental.

― Pope Rusty I (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 20 March 2013 16:46 (2 months ago) Permalink

it's overtly sentimental, it's certainly framed as sentimental--but it's harrowing and despairing. i think i said elsewhere around here that it falls into the "uncanny valley" of happy endings.

― ryan, Wednesday, 20 March 2013 17:10 (2 months ago) Permalink

i almost feel what MZS is talking about there, Spielberg's great talent for the "qualia" of visceral experience, is what makes that scene (and the rest of AI) so discomfiting and compelling. almost as if kubrick wanted spielberg to direct it just because he knew that quality would put the movie over the top.

― ryan, Wednesday, 20 March 2013 17:12 (2 months ago) Permalink

from the comments:

DAVID CONRAD | MARCH 19, 2013 4:56 PMREPLY

I found Seitz's comment about Spielberg working in the "Stanley Kramer vein" of "glossy Hollywood entertainment" a bit difficult to understand. Kramer's Holocaust movie, "Judgment at Nuremberg," is a strikingly unglossy film that includes several minutes of actual concentration camp footage. Those images cause the mostly-theatrical violence in "Schindler's List" to fade from memory. But in Kramer's movie the Holocaust footage, however powerfully disturbing, is not essential to the story. It could have been excised without sacrificing any of the script's quality, but what would "Schindler's List" be without the Red Dress girl and the shower scene?

Both films explore issues of collective guilt and individual responsibility, but "Judgment" has the wider, more challenging sample size. The German cast includes uneducated housekeepers, jurists conversant in American legal theory, and an aristocratic widow in addition to unrepentant Nazis. Contrast Marlene Dietrich or Max Schell's characters in "Judgment" with the almost cartoonish depiction of Goeth in "Schindler's List." "Judgment" knows full well the horrors the Nazis committed, and presents them to us in unvarnished fashion, but it also asks us to think about blame. The farthest "Schindler" goes down this road, I think, is to prompt us to wonder what we would have done in the title character's place. How much more true that is of "Judgment," which asks us to imagine ourselves in a variety of different social positions, and as both accused and accuser. Kramer aims for and hits a much higher mark than does Spielberg.

― turds (Hungry4Ass), Wednesday, 20 March 2013 17:24 (2 months ago) Permalink

TC: But even when people find fault with a particular movie of his, he's on a sort of hallowed plane I mistrust. Interestingly, in my experience, that's especially true among younger movie buffs -- who might be expected to think of Spielberg as an oldie and, you know, chafe a bit. Instead, he seems to be a hallowed figure to them, the guy who defines what movies can be.

carson makes some good points in there, but I don't know what planet he's living on here - Spielberg's probably as uncool now as he's ever been. it was a little aggravating during award season to read so many people dismissing Lincoln as boring manipulative Oscar bait, and then go on to praise Argo in the next sentence. spielberg's style has become increasingly unfashionable, whereas Affleck is tuned into the 'moment' - i think he's a far worse panderer than spielberg (in terms of degree and in terms of ability), but he's one that people just accept at face value right now for whatever reason

― turds (Hungry4Ass), Wednesday, 20 March 2013 17:28 (2 months ago) Permalink

otm

― ryan, Wednesday, 20 March 2013 17:39 (2 months ago) Permalink

totes otes

― zero dark (s1ocki), Wednesday, 20 March 2013 17:48 (2 months ago) Permalink

dud beyond dud

― yellow jacket (spazzmatazz), Wednesday, 20 March 2013 17:55 (2 months ago) Permalink

Contrast Marlene Dietrich or Max Schell's characters in "Judgment" with the almost cartoonish depiction of Goeth in "Schindler's List."

are you fucking serious

― the little prince of inane false binary hype (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 20 March 2013 17:56 (2 months ago) Permalink

at best I would accept (with proof required) that Amon Goeth is as cartoonish as Dietrick and Schell.

― the little prince of inane false binary hype (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 20 March 2013 17:57 (2 months ago) Permalink

thinking of 'argo' and spielberg makes me think of 'munich', which has its flaws but is so well-executed and disturbing in places. it makes 'argo' look so lightweight and easy to digest (which it is.)

― christmas candy bar (al leong), Wednesday, 20 March 2013 18:05 (2 months ago) Permalink

Munich is dark, majestic, conflicted, difficult and virtuosic.

Argo is a nice, 20-second double dutch routine.

― Zero Dark 33⅓: The Final Insult (Eric H.), Wednesday, 20 March 2013 18:10 (2 months ago) Permalink

i like the neat trick argo pulls of making high-powered producers into heroes and PAs into villains.

― christmas candy bar (al leong), Wednesday, 20 March 2013 18:14 (2 months ago) Permalink

Union workers literally getting in the way of very important phone calls.

― Zero Dark 33⅓: The Final Insult (Eric H.), Wednesday, 20 March 2013 18:15 (2 months ago) Permalink

lol

― zero dark (s1ocki), Wednesday, 20 March 2013 18:22 (2 months ago) Permalink

that scene... just the worst

― zero dark (s1ocki), Wednesday, 20 March 2013 18:22 (2 months ago) Permalink

On the other hand: wealthy Dems like Affleck just being themselves.

― the little prince of inane false binary hype (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 20 March 2013 18:23 (2 months ago) Permalink

munich owns so hard. i dont think that movie gets its due

seitz brings up spielberg the showman vs spielberg the artist, and i think that push-and-pull tension is most vivid in Schindler's List - which is why i like it so much. carson's point about the shower scene becoming "grotesque at the moment the women greet real water coming out of the showerheads with ululations of relief" is well taken, and i say that as someone who was never too persuaded by hoberman's criticism of that scene, but i still love the chutzpah of staging an auschwitz gas chamber scene like something out of Jaws. by the time he made Lincoln, which i liked a lot, he was too self-conscious to pull a move like that... closest he gets is the theater fakeout at the end

― turds (Hungry4Ass), Wednesday, 20 March 2013 18:25 (2 months ago) Permalink

arkin said 'argo fuck yourself' so many times i thought the sad coda was going to be that he'd developed dementia

― christmas candy bar (al leong), Wednesday, 20 March 2013 18:26 (2 months ago) Permalink

munich is basically the standard by which '70s geopolitical thrillers should be measured. i think the only better film in recent years in the same genre is probs 'carlos'

― christmas candy bar (al leong), Wednesday, 20 March 2013 18:28 (2 months ago) Permalink

arkin said 'argo fuck yourself' so many times i thought the sad coda was going to be that he'd developed dementia

― christmas candy bar (al leong), Wednesday, March 20, 2013 2:26 PM (7 minutes ago) Bookmark

lol

― turds (Hungry4Ass), Wednesday, 20 March 2013 18:34 (2 months ago) Permalink

A helluva montage: audio of Arkin saying "argo fuck yourself" as Lincoln walks into Ford's Theater, Seward holds the Emancipation Proclamation in awe, and Donald Sutherland as X on the park bench saying, "In that document. Lay the Vietnam War."

Cut to title COMING SOON

― the little prince of inane false binary hype (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 20 March 2013 18:42 (2 months ago) Permalink

really, read what Kael had to say about Abby Mann (the writer of the teleplay and film of Judgment at Nuremberg) sometime. He accepted his Oscar "on behalf of intellectuals everywhere."

― Pope Rusty I (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 20 March 2013 18:44 (2 months ago) Permalink

http://www.indiewire.com/survey/the-spielberg-survey/

Film: JAWS
Direction: JAWS
Lead Performance: Daniel Day-Lewis, LINCOLN
Supporting Performance: Ralph Fiennes, SCHINDLER'S LIST
Scene: JAWS (various)
Shot: JAWS (various)
Hero: RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK
Villain: SCHINDLER'S LIST
Screenplay: LINCOLN
Score/Soundtrack: JAWS
Worst Film: HOOK

― alternately mean and handsy (Eric H.), Tuesday, 2 April 2013 15:11 (2 months ago) Permalink

"we have top men working on this survey"

― zero dark (s1ocki), Tuesday, 2 April 2013 15:14 (2 months ago) Permalink

Hook as the worst? It's definitely a bad one, but The Lost World and Always are way worse. wanna say The Terminal is on that level too but I kinda don't trust the viewing I had of it.

― ta-nehisi goatse (fadanuf4erybody), Tuesday, 2 April 2013 15:16 (2 months ago) Permalink

re-screened SPR - not as sappy as I remembered but the last half kinda drags. a lot.

― Kiarostami bag (milo z), Tuesday, 2 April 2013 15:17 (2 months ago) Permalink

"we have top men working on this survey"

This line reads so kinky to me now.

― alternately mean and handsy (Eric H.), Tuesday, 2 April 2013 15:20 (2 months ago) Permalink

top. men.

― zero dark (s1ocki), Tuesday, 2 April 2013 15:24 (2 months ago) Permalink

We (heh, heh) are not sehr-stee.

― alternately mean and handsy (Eric H.), Tuesday, 2 April 2013 15:33 (2 months ago) Permalink

Spielberg was being interviewed by Kermode a few months ago and he admitted that he hopes to one day find something he likes about Hook.

― Gukbe, Tuesday, 2 April 2013 23:28 (2 months ago) Permalink

is it really that bad? i saw it again a couple years ago and actually kinda dug it. but it was new year's eve and i was pretty hungover so my standards were fairly low.

― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Tuesday, 2 April 2013 23:43 (2 months ago) Permalink

I think the most effective lead performances in his oeuvre may be by Henry Thomas and Christian Bale.

― Pope Rusty I (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 2 April 2013 23:54 (2 months ago) Permalink

hook is pretty horrible, the whole thing plays like the dwarf dinner in 'the hobbit' but with worse songs and even hammier acting, if possible.

― christmas candy bar (al leong), Tuesday, 2 April 2013 23:57 (2 months ago) Permalink

bale is really good in empire of the sun! ben stiller also surprisingly malevolent.

― Philip Nunez, Wednesday, 3 April 2013 00:00 (2 months ago) Permalink

Bale's best perf, period, is in EOTS.

― the little prince of inane false binary hype (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 3 April 2013 00:06 (2 months ago) Permalink

I'm glad The Sugarland Express got some support down in that all-important #12-15 range in a number of categories.

― clemenza, Wednesday, 3 April 2013 01:47 (2 months ago) Permalink

what women got top billing in Spielberg films? Goldie Hawn, Dee Wallace, Holly Hunter?

― Pope Rusty I (Dr Morbius), Friday, 5 April 2013 00:54 (2 months ago) Permalink

Hmm, top billing? Sally Field? Kate Capshaw? Laura Dern?

It's a good question, though I would contend that Karen Allen in "Raiders" is one of the formative Hollywood strong woman roles.

― Josh in Chicago, Friday, 5 April 2013 01:06 (2 months ago) Permalink

I mean first. Although Hawn is arguably the only one who is the star of the film.

formative? in a retro film? after Hollywood had kinda fucking died?

surely Ebert musta wrote about Bette Davis once in a while?

― Pope Rusty I (Dr Morbius), Friday, 5 April 2013 01:24 (2 months ago) Permalink

what women got top billing in Spielberg films? Goldie Hawn, Dee Wallace, Holly Hunter?

Whoopi Goldberg

― The Complete Afterbirth of the Cool (WilliamC), Friday, 5 April 2013 01:30 (2 months ago) Permalink

right

― Pope Rusty I (Dr Morbius), Friday, 5 April 2013 01:33 (2 months ago) Permalink

I meant formative in that for a huge segment of the post-Spielberg generation of movies lovers, for whom "Raiders" is especially iconic, she stands tall as the perfect foil for one of the greatest action heroes. Though she (and the film) are of the retro template, the movie itself was, of course, contemporary, and strong female leads in action films are (and always have been) few and far between, making Allen's role particularly effective in its impact.

― Josh in Chicago, Friday, 5 April 2013 01:48 (2 months ago) Permalink

ah, "action films" again

― Pope Rusty I (Dr Morbius), Friday, 5 April 2013 01:48 (2 months ago) Permalink

I've read that line, and to a degree you're right, but her strength gets exactly one scene to show itself: the bar scene. The rest of the movie Spielberg punishes her for it.

― the little prince of inane false binary hype (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 5 April 2013 01:49 (2 months ago) Permalink

xpost

― the little prince of inane false binary hype (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 5 April 2013 01:49 (2 months ago) Permalink

I do like the ending, though, where they are both tied together and clearly both scared shitless.

― Josh in Chicago, Friday, 5 April 2013 01:55 (2 months ago) Permalink

3 weeks pass...

Steven Spielberg has found his next directing project: an adaptation of American Sniper, the autobiography of Navy SEAL Chris Kyle, which is set up at Warner Bros.

Bradley Cooper is attached to star and has been developing the project as a producer.

― turds (Hungry4Ass), Thursday, 2 May 2013 21:41 (1 month ago) Permalink

gross

― four Marxes plus four Obamas plus four Bin Ladens (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 2 May 2013 21:44 (1 month ago) Permalink

normally i'd say ugh yuck get it away, but i actually kind of trust spielberg at this point in his career to do something interesting with that.

― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Thursday, 2 May 2013 21:47 (1 month ago) Permalink

with Bradley Cooper? that guy is such a worthless sack of shit

― four Marxes plus four Obamas plus four Bin Ladens (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 2 May 2013 21:50 (1 month ago) Permalink

it's hard for me to imagine how it could be good, but i guess i should trust spielby

― turds (Hungry4Ass), Thursday, 2 May 2013 21:57 (1 month ago) Permalink

^^ xp

― Chris S, Thursday, 2 May 2013 22:03 (1 month ago) Permalink

ZDT pt. 2 - get ready, internet.

― Gukbe, Thursday, 2 May 2013 22:06 (1 month ago) Permalink

i look fwd to glenn greenwald's 2,300 word 'i haven't seen it, but' review.

― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Thursday, 2 May 2013 22:08 (1 month ago) Permalink

is Spielberg hate ilx'S MOST BORING MANIA? even w/ ethan gone?

― Pope Rusty I (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 2 May 2013 22:08 (1 month ago) Permalink

im closer to a spielberg apologist than hater. but chris kyle... ugh

― turds (Hungry4Ass), Thursday, 2 May 2013 22:10 (1 month ago) Permalink

ilx seems fairly pro-spielberg these days

― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Thursday, 2 May 2013 22:11 (1 month ago) Permalink

basically everyone just said that they dont like the idea but they trust spielberg dude

― we're up all night to get (s1ocki), Thursday, 2 May 2013 22:11 (1 month ago) Permalink

is consistently misreading other posters ilx'S MOST BORING MANIA?

― we're up all night to get (s1ocki), Thursday, 2 May 2013 22:12 (1 month ago) Permalink

gimme a hug

― Pope Rusty I (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 2 May 2013 22:17 (1 month ago) Permalink

Yeah I love Spielberg but given the material I'm not sure he's going to pull off what I'd like.

― Gukbe, Thursday, 2 May 2013 23:35 (1 month ago) Permalink

Spielberg should make a movie out of "Where Men Win Glory," the Pat Tillman book, instead.

― Josh in Chicago, Thursday, 2 May 2013 23:51 (1 month ago) Permalink

the Chris Kyle book has lots of opportunities for both first-20 minutes of SPR action and maudlin homefront stuff
there's no real narrative hook to it, though - he doesn't overcome anything, we don't even win the war; he was a very good shot who killed a lot of people and was apparently good at being a SEAL for his entire career.

― Kiarostami bag (milo z), Friday, 3 May 2013 00:04 (1 month ago) Permalink

Well he was shot and killed at a gun range. I

― Gukbe, Friday, 3 May 2013 00:12 (1 month ago) Permalink

So you know he overcame "life"

― Gukbe, Friday, 3 May 2013 00:12 (1 month ago) Permalink

On Saturday, February 2, 2013, Kyle and a companion, Chad Littlefield, were shot and killed at the Rough Creek Lodge shooting range in Erath County, Texas[16] by 25-year-old fellow veteran Eddie Ray Routh, whom Kyle and Littlefield had purportedly taken to the gun range in an effort to help him with his post traumatic stress disorder.

― christmas candy bar (al leong), Friday, 3 May 2013 00:14 (1 month ago) Permalink

― christmas candy bar (al leong), Friday, 3 May 2013 00:16 (1 month ago) Permalink

weird. I hadn't made the connection that the victim was the one who had written the book.

― sheer tip (how's life), Friday, 3 May 2013 00:17 (1 month ago) Permalink

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.