Steven Spielberg - classic or dud

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (804 of them)
allyzay i have seen lisztomania and yr hyperbole impresses me none

mark s (mark s), Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:48 (8 years ago) Permalink

jaws rules

j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:49 (8 years ago) Permalink


from up-coming director's cut

mark s (mark s), Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:51 (8 years ago) Permalink

free frisky

j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 28 July 2005 14:52 (8 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 (8 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 (8 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 (8 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 (8 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 (8 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 (8 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 (8 years ago) Permalink

wow you musta sawn i difft version to me blount

mark s (mark s), Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:00 (8 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.

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 (8 years ago) Permalink

claymation dinosaurs

Allyzay knows a little German (allyzay), Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:01 (8 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 (8 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 (8 years ago) Permalink

give him our best mark

j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:04 (8 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 (8 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 (8 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 (8 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 (8 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 (8 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 (8 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 (8 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 (8 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 (8 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 (8 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 (8 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 (8 years ago) Permalink

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

3, Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:46 (8 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 (8 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 (8 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 (8 years ago) Permalink

i dare you to ignore him!

4, Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:51 (8 years ago) Permalink


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

3, Thursday, 28 July 2005 15:58 (8 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 (8 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 (8 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 (8 years ago) Permalink

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

6, Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:08 (8 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 (8 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."

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 (8 years ago) Permalink

(like storing data in big plates of glass)

s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:17 (8 years ago) Permalink

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

Leon C. (Ex Leon), Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:18 (8 years ago) Permalink

it makes no sense

s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 28 July 2005 16:18 (8 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 (8 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 (8 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 (8 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 (8 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 (8 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 (8 years ago) Permalink


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.