If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Telegraph)   "Where are the great movies?" asks the director of Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull   (telegraph.co.uk) divider line 186
    More: Ironic, Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, Steven Spielberg  
•       •       •

3944 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 28 Nov 2011 at 4:47 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



186 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread
 
2011-11-28 02:27:33 PM
Yes, Steven Spielberg has never made a good movie.
 
2011-11-28 02:34:16 PM
Instead he said he relied on his pre-production ritual of watching four classics: Seven Samurai, The Searchers, Lawrence of Arabia, and It's a Wonderful Life, to help ensure the success of new projects.

I'm not even sure any of those four could make it into production these days. The Seven Samurai is long and the violence is anything but glamorous. Half of the action in Lawrence of Arabia would be replaced with CGI. Westerns hardly ever cut it anymore with only a few exceptions, and those seem to do poorly at the box office, and "It's a Wonderful Life" would be considered a made-for-TV project on the Hallmark channel.
 
2011-11-28 02:36:20 PM
Great movies are made every single year. Just look for them. Sometimes they are small, indie movies and sometimes they are blockbusters. But they are there as they ever have been.
 
2011-11-28 02:36:36 PM
digitalpolyphony.webs.com
 
2011-11-28 02:38:34 PM
There have been great movies made over the past couple decades, it's just that Spielberg hasn't made one in a while so he thinks they don't exist. Stevey, watch a good Woody Allen movie and see how it's done. I really love Match Point. Midnight in Paris was pretty damn good too and both were made within the last decade.
 
2011-11-28 02:42:29 PM

dopeydwarf: There have been great movies made over the past couple decades, it's just that Spielberg hasn't made one in a while so he thinks they don't exist. Stevey, watch a good Woody Allen movie and see how it's done. I really love Match Point. Midnight in Paris was pretty damn good too and both were made within the last decade.


Depending how broadly we are defining "great", I think Munich would count as a great movie. It's not an all timer, but if by "great" we mean something like 25 or 50 best of a decade, then Munich would count to me.
 
2011-11-28 02:43:05 PM
I would ask you the same thing, guy-whose-name-was-associated-with-Super-8.
 
2011-11-28 02:46:18 PM

Nabb1: Instead he said he relied on his pre-production ritual of watching four classics: Seven Samurai, The Searchers, Lawrence of Arabia, and It's a Wonderful Life, to help ensure the success of new projects.

I'm not even sure any of those four could make it into production these days. The Seven Samurai is long and the violence is anything but glamorous. Half of the action in Lawrence of Arabia would be replaced with CGI. Westerns hardly ever cut it anymore with only a few exceptions, and those seem to do poorly at the box office, and "It's a Wonderful Life" would be considered a made-for-TV project on the Hallmark channel.



I'd agree that it would be difficult to make these movies today in Hollywood, but there are a lot of production houses overseas that would have the balls for it I think. South Korea for instance has had consistently good movies that are very different from your common blockbuster fodder coming out for years now. The Man from Nowhere, Oldboy, and Thirst comes to mind. And let's not forget that Seven Samurai is a Japanese movie and you can always depend on them to at least let Takashi Miike off the chain to make something... unique.
 
2011-11-28 02:52:55 PM

DamnYankees: dopeydwarf: There have been great movies made over the past couple decades, it's just that Spielberg hasn't made one in a while so he thinks they don't exist. Stevey, watch a good Woody Allen movie and see how it's done. I really love Match Point. Midnight in Paris was pretty damn good too and both were made within the last decade.

Depending how broadly we are defining "great", I think Munich would count as a great movie. It's not an all timer, but if by "great" we mean something like 25 or 50 best of a decade, then Munich would count to me.



Oh yeah, Munich was definitely great. It's a grim one which is why I think a lot of people wouldn't do repeat viewings, but I was on the edge of my seat throughout it.
 
2011-11-28 02:53:04 PM

dopeydwarf: There have been great movies made over the past couple decades, it's just that Spielberg hasn't made one in a while so he thinks they don't exist. Stevey, watch a good Woody Allen movie and see how it's done. I really love Match Point. Midnight in Paris was pretty damn good too and both were made within the last decade.


Hook, Jurassic Park, Saving Private Ryan, Schindler's List, Minority Report and Munich have all been made within the last couple decades. Catch Me If You Can was fun if not great.

The Adventures of Tin Tin is currently at 86% on Rotten Tomatoes. Plus he was the producer of Gladiator, Super 8, Letters from Iwo Jima and True Grit.

But yeah, Woody Allen could help him learn how to make an entertaining film
 
2011-11-28 02:54:03 PM
Oh, and obligatory:

www-deadline-com.vimg.net
 
2011-11-28 02:57:48 PM

mitchcumstein1: Hook, Jurassic Park, Saving Private Ryan, Schindler's List, Minority Report and Munich have all been made within the last couple decades. Catch Me If You Can was fun if not great.


One of these things is not like the other...
 
2011-11-28 03:00:10 PM
Someone ought to tell the gentlemen to go to his multiplex and see The Muppets.
 
2011-11-28 03:02:05 PM
There was that War of the Worlds remake that was...oh, yeah, that sucked donkey balls. Who was the director of that one again? That guy should have been fired.
 
2011-11-28 03:02:44 PM

Lando Lincoln: There was that War of the Worlds remake that was...oh, yeah, that sucked donkey balls. Who was the director of that one again? That guy should have been fired.


That was an excellent, excellent movie with one fatal flaw (the stupid son thing). But otherwise, brilliantly made movie.
 
2011-11-28 03:06:17 PM

DamnYankees: mitchcumstein1: Hook, Jurassic Park, Saving Private Ryan, Schindler's List, Minority Report and Munich have all been made within the last couple decades. Catch Me If You Can was fun if not great.

One of these things is not like the other...


I was 12 when that movie came out, it was made to appeal to me. I saw it with my grandfather, he died shortly thereafter, it will always have a soft spot in my heart.
 
2011-11-28 03:06:49 PM

mitchcumstein1: DamnYankees: mitchcumstein1: Hook, Jurassic Park, Saving Private Ryan, Schindler's List, Minority Report and Munich have all been made within the last couple decades. Catch Me If You Can was fun if not great.

One of these things is not like the other...

I was 12 when that movie came out, it was made to appeal to me. I saw it with my grandfather, he died shortly thereafter, it will always have a soft spot in my heart.


That's cool - I liked that movie a lot when I was a kid also. But its objectively not a very good movie.

Good music, though.
 
2011-11-28 03:06:50 PM

DamnYankees: Lando Lincoln: There was that War of the Worlds remake that was...oh, yeah, that sucked donkey balls. Who was the director of that one again? That guy should have been fired.

That was an excellent, excellent movie with one fatal flaw (the stupid son thing). But otherwise, brilliantly made movie.


collider.com
 
2011-11-28 03:07:23 PM

DamnYankees: Lando Lincoln: There was that War of the Worlds remake that was...oh, yeah, that sucked donkey balls. Who was the director of that one again? That guy should have been fired.

That was an excellent, excellent movie with one fatal flaw (the stupid son thing). But otherwise, brilliantly made movie.


You are out of your freaking mind.
 
2011-11-28 03:08:37 PM

Sybarite: DamnYankees: Lando Lincoln: There was that War of the Worlds remake that was...oh, yeah, that sucked donkey balls. Who was the director of that one again? That guy should have been fired.

That was an excellent, excellent movie with one fatal flaw (the stupid son thing). But otherwise, brilliantly made movie.

[collider.com image 600x336]


Lando Lincoln: DamnYankees: Lando Lincoln: There was that War of the Worlds remake that was...oh, yeah, that sucked donkey balls. Who was the director of that one again? That guy should have been fired.

That was an excellent, excellent movie with one fatal flaw (the stupid son thing). But otherwise, brilliantly made movie.

You are out of your freaking mind.


I don;t know what to say. The movie itself is not amazing, but the craftsmanship really is. Spielberg knows how to tell stories.
 
2011-11-28 03:09:36 PM

DamnYankees: That's cool - I liked that movie a lot when I was a kid also. But its objectively not a very good movie


No, it's not a great film, but it is entertaining to the people it was made for, which is more than can be said for most recent Woody Allen movies.
 
2011-11-28 03:14:08 PM
Two main reasons. First, the big studios are a bit gun-shy of losing their asses. Make a big enough bomb, and it can bankrupt your entire studio. After some big flops, a lot of them now want to maximize profits and they do that with a carefully selected handful of movies year in and year out. It's cynical, but it's keeping them in business. They can tell you the percentage of people that will attend a sequel just because they like the first movie. The studios can also tell you the percentage of profit increase that a film will earn if it gets NC-17 rating instead of an R rating. It's a science they've perfected and have winnowed down to a formula.

The other issue is the public at large. The studios put out a few big budget movies and a lot fewer small budget films because the studios have learned what we like, and most of what we like is crap. A few big-budget epics every year with a well-defined male/female dynamic, a couple low-rent films targeting the 16-24 crowd in which the cast of characters are always high school seniors, sprinkled in with a few sleepers that did well at film festivals and are getting a wider release. Americans like spotless heroes and easy to spot villains and a tidy resolution that ends with Happily Ever After. Are they gonna play The Raid in the United States in wide release? Probably not because some of the violence is graphic and parts of it may be offensive to American sensibilities.
 
2011-11-28 03:15:43 PM
Most overrated director ever.
 
2011-11-28 03:16:45 PM

DamnYankees: Great movies are made every single year. Just look for them. Sometimes they are small, indie movies and sometimes they are blockbusters. But they are there as they ever have been.


Amen. Great movies are out there, you just have to seek them out.
 
2011-11-28 03:19:38 PM

DamnYankees: I don;t know what to say. The movie itself is not amazing, but the craftsmanship really is. Spielberg knows how to tell stories.


Yeah, "craftsmanship." As in, "Hey, wouldn't it be AWESOME if we had a scene where the aliens attacked a ferry boat full of cars and people and the boat started tipping over and the cars were all rolling around and smashing up people and stuff? And people DROWNING in the cars! Yeah, I know it doesn't make a goddamn bit of sense to have a ferry boat full of cars that don't work. I mean, why wouldn't all the people just push the dead cars off of the ferry boat and then an extra thousand people would be able to be loaded onto the ferry boat every trip? If we were to write this sensibly, then we wouldn't have that AWESOME SCENE where the cars go flying into the water and shiat!"

"Craftsmanship." Otherwise known as "eye candy."
 
2011-11-28 03:21:01 PM

Lando Lincoln: "Craftsmanship." Otherwise known as "eye candy."


Please settle down, friend. War of the Worlds wasn't even that good a movie to look at - it was grungy and dark.
 
2011-11-28 03:26:48 PM
Film/TV quality took a serious nosedive ever since "NYPD Blue shakey-cam" became a popular technique.
 
2011-11-28 03:27:19 PM

mitchcumstein1: DamnYankees: That's cool - I liked that movie a lot when I was a kid also. But its objectively not a very good movie

No, it's not a great film, but it is entertaining to the people it was made for, which is more than can be said for most recent Woody Allen movies.



img.photobucket.com
 
2011-11-28 03:28:20 PM

Bukharin: Film/TV quality took a serious nosedive ever since "NYPD Blue shakey-cam" became a popular technique.



Thankfully the Borne series is over AFAIK. Hopefully the "technique" will die off.
 
2011-11-28 03:31:22 PM

dopeydwarf: mitchcumstein1: DamnYankees: That's cool - I liked that movie a lot when I was a kid also. But its objectively not a very good movie

No, it's not a great film, but it is entertaining to the people it was made for, which is more than can be said for most recent Woody Allen movies.


[img.photobucket.com image 640x480]


He's been hit and miss over the last 10-15 years and you know it.
 
2011-11-28 03:32:57 PM

coco ebert: Most overrated director ever.


We not talking about Lucas. It's the other one.
 
2011-11-28 03:34:46 PM
What is this, the annual meeting of the Directors Guild of America?

Take it easy, guys. Here's what he said:

"There's not a lot of films I'd watch that are made over the past 20 years, because I'm much more of a romantic. I like to go way back to the source. I look at a lot of silent movies for inspiration because they're all told visually and they're all told with hyper-extended performance and with wonderful use of a frame. It's a way of getting my engine started."

And then he criticized how movies are funded.

OMGWTF!
 
2011-11-28 03:35:15 PM

mitchcumstein1: dopeydwarf: mitchcumstein1: DamnYankees: That's cool - I liked that movie a lot when I was a kid also. But its objectively not a very good movie

No, it's not a great film, but it is entertaining to the people it was made for, which is more than can be said for most recent Woody Allen movies.


[img.photobucket.com image 640x480]

He's been hit and miss over the last 10-15 years and you know it.



You dare discount Match Point? For shame.
 
2011-11-28 03:39:52 PM
Well, Princess Bride was made in 1987, so it doesn't meet his arbitrary time limit.
Law Abiding Citizen was IMHO very well done.
 
2011-11-28 03:45:33 PM

dopeydwarf: mitchcumstein1: dopeydwarf: mitchcumstein1: DamnYankees: That's cool - I liked that movie a lot when I was a kid also. But its objectively not a very good movie

No, it's not a great film, but it is entertaining to the people it was made for, which is more than can be said for most recent Woody Allen movies.


[img.photobucket.com image 640x480]

He's been hit and miss over the last 10-15 years and you know it.


You dare discount Match Point? For shame.


That would be a hit. Cassandra' Dream, for example would be a miss. Scoop would be an abortion.
 
2011-11-28 03:45:37 PM

mitchcumstein1: dopeydwarf: There have been great movies made over the past couple decades, it's just that Spielberg hasn't made one in a while so he thinks they don't exist. Stevey, watch a good Woody Allen movie and see how it's done. I really love Match Point. Midnight in Paris was pretty damn good too and both were made within the last decade.

Hook, Jurassic Park, Saving Private Ryan, Schindler's List, Minority Report and Munich have all been made within the last couple decades. Catch Me If You Can was fun if not great.

The Adventures of Tin Tin is currently at 86% on Rotten Tomatoes. Plus he was the producer of Gladiator, Super 8, Letters from Iwo Jima and True Grit.

But yeah, Woody Allen could help him learn how to make an entertaining film



Funny you should say that, I just watched Jurassic Park on BR the other night and for some reason it just didn't hook me in the same way it did when I was 13. Not a bad movie, but it hasn't aged particularly well IMO. I am a big fan of Schindler's List, Minority Report, Iwo Jima and Munich though. Saving Private Ryan is good but I'm not so sure I'd call it great. FWIW though, this is one of my favorite war movies ever:

www.moviegoods.com

Take that as you will.
 
2011-11-28 03:48:39 PM

mitchcumstein1: dopeydwarf: mitchcumstein1: dopeydwarf: mitchcumstein1: DamnYankees:

You dare discount Match Point? For shame.

That would be a hit. Cassandra' Dream, for example would be a miss. Scoop would be an abortion.



You shan't throw the baby out with the bath water.
 
2011-11-28 04:38:09 PM

dopeydwarf: mitchcumstein1: dopeydwarf: mitchcumstein1: dopeydwarf: mitchcumstein1: DamnYankees:

You dare discount Match Point? For shame.

That would be a hit. Cassandra' Dream, for example would be a miss. Scoop would be an abortion.


You shan't throw the baby out with the bath water.


Not saying you should, but to saying that Speilberg should go to Woody Allen to better know how to make an entertaining film is crazy talk.

I think Jurassic Park has aged fantastically. The CGI still looks plausible today almost 20 years on. Hell, it looks more realistic than half the shiat in the Star Wars prequels.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on Saving Private Ryan.
 
2011-11-28 04:45:16 PM

mitchcumstein1: We'll just have to agree to disagree on Saving Private Ryan.


Saving Private Ryan looks much worse in retrospect because of Band of Brothers, which basically did the same thing but did it SO much better. It just had the time needed to tell the story better.
 
2011-11-28 04:50:00 PM
Hey Steven. I think you've overlooked this little studio called Pixar. Update your Netflix queue, will ya?
 
2011-11-28 04:53:46 PM

DamnYankees: mitchcumstein1: We'll just have to agree to disagree on Saving Private Ryan.

Saving Private Ryan looks much worse in retrospect because of Band of Brothers, which basically did the same thing but did it SO much better. It just had the time needed to tell the story better.


Disagree, I think they complement each other very well.
 
2011-11-28 04:55:23 PM
In a parallel universe the robot shark worked and "Steven Spielberg" carries the same weight as "Roger Corman"
 
2011-11-28 04:58:07 PM

dopeydwarf: FWIW though, this is one of my favorite war movies ever:



Take that as you will.


Great. Now I have David Spade's impression of Michael J. Fox in my head.
 
2011-11-28 05:01:33 PM
I enjoyed Crystal Skull. Was I not supposed to?

Could have done without Shia, but still enjoyed it.
 
2011-11-28 05:02:27 PM
"Harold and Kumar"
 
2011-11-28 05:02:46 PM
No good films made in the last two decades...

So when did that PG13 rubbish start, exactly?
 
2011-11-28 05:03:04 PM

Nabb1: I'm not even sure any of those four could make it into production these days.


And movies these days suck.

So I don't see where it's a problem. The studios want to shiat on us, we can play video games instead.
 
2011-11-28 05:05:54 PM

penguinfark: I enjoyed Crystal Skull.


I didn't know a lot of eight-year-olds posted on Fark.
 
2011-11-28 05:06:40 PM

DamnYankees: mitchcumstein1: We'll just have to agree to disagree on Saving Private Ryan.

Saving Private Ryan looks much worse in retrospect because of Band of Brothers, which basically did the same thing but did it SO much better. It just had the time needed to tell the story better.


Not really. Saving Private Ryan did the thing. Band of Brothers came along and told a different story while cannibalizing all the stuff that was good from Spielberg a full decade later.

It's like saying the ipad 2 is revolutionary technology whilst ignoring fact that the original iphone is the device that actually opened up the touch pad market beyond institutional devices like vending machines and restaurant menus.
 
2011-11-28 05:09:01 PM

doglover: Band of Brothers came along and told a different story while cannibalizing all the stuff that was good from Spielberg a full decade later.


Just to note - Band of Brother was filmed something like 1 year after Saving Private Ryan, not a decade.

doglover: It's like saying the ipad 2 is revolutionary technology whilst ignoring fact that the original iphone is the device that actually opened up the touch pad market beyond institutional devices like vending machines and restaurant menus.


But I never said Band of Brother was "revolutionary". I said it was better. I don't deny Saving Private Ryan was a more innovative piece of filmmaking, but that doesn't mean its better than that which built on it.
 
2011-11-28 05:10:34 PM
I saw Schindler's List. It wasn't funny.
 
2011-11-28 05:19:57 PM

DamnYankees: Great movies are made every single year. Just look for them. Sometimes they are small, indie movies and sometimes they are blockbusters. But they are there as they ever have been.


Precisely. And despite Spielberg's recent missteps,I want to believe that the man's still capable of helming thrilling flicks.
 
2011-11-28 05:21:12 PM

Langston: Two main reasons. First, the big studios are a bit gun-shy of losing their asses. Make a big enough bomb, and it can bankrupt your entire studio. After some big flops, a lot of them now want to maximize profits and they do that with a carefully selected handful of movies year in and year out. It's cynical, but it's keeping them in business. They can tell you the percentage of people that will attend a sequel just because they like the first movie. The studios can also tell you the percentage of profit increase that a film will earn if it gets NC-17 rating instead of an R rating. It's a science they've perfected and have winnowed down to a formula.

The other issue is the public at large. The studios put out a few big budget movies and a lot fewer small budget films because the studios have learned what we like, and most of what we like is crap. A few big-budget epics every year with a well-defined male/female dynamic, a couple low-rent films targeting the 16-24 crowd in which the cast of characters are always high school seniors, sprinkled in with a few sleepers that did well at film festivals and are getting a wider release. Americans like spotless heroes and easy to spot villains and a tidy resolution that ends with Happily Ever After. Are they gonna play The Raid in the United States in wide release? Probably not because some of the violence is graphic and parts of it may be offensive to American sensibilities.


I am having a hard time thinking of anything like this doing well recently.
 
2011-11-28 05:23:16 PM

DamnYankees: Sybarite: DamnYankees: Lando Lincoln: There was that War of the Worlds remake that was...oh, yeah, that sucked donkey balls. Who was the director of that one again? That guy should have been fired.

That was an excellent, excellent movie with one fatal flaw (the stupid son thing). But otherwise, brilliantly made movie.

[collider.com image 600x336]

Lando Lincoln: DamnYankees: Lando Lincoln: There was that War of the Worlds remake that was...oh, yeah, that sucked donkey balls. Who was the director of that one again? That guy should have been fired.

That was an excellent, excellent movie with one fatal flaw (the stupid son thing). But otherwise, brilliantly made movie.

You are out of your freaking mind.

I don;t know what to say. The movie itself is not amazing, but the craftsmanship really is. Spielberg knows how to tell stories.


One might even say, Amazing Stories.
 
2011-11-28 05:26:13 PM

dryknife: I saw Schindler's List. It wasn't funny.


That gag where he claims two people were worth the price of a pin was a hoot.
 
2011-11-28 05:28:26 PM

Fano: dryknife: I saw Schindler's List. It wasn't funny.

That gag where he claims two people were worth the price of a pin was a hoot.


Well, not Crystal Skull funny, but still...
 
2011-11-28 05:29:35 PM

hitchking: What is this, the annual meeting of the Directors Guild of America?

Take it easy, guys. Here's what he said:

"There's not a lot of films I'd watch that are made over the past 20 years, because I'm much more of a romantic. I like to go way back to the source. I look at a lot of silent movies for inspiration because they're all told visually and they're all told with hyper-extended performance and with wonderful use of a frame. It's a way of getting my engine started."

And then he criticized how movies are funded.

OMGWTF!


So he likes exposition to be provided by title cards?
 
2011-11-28 05:29:50 PM

dopeydwarf: Oh yeah, Munich was definitely great. It's a grim one which is why I think a lot of people wouldn't do repeat viewings, but I was on the edge of my seat throughout it.


Munich is a farking fantastic film. Even if you're already familiar with the events, the suspense/intrigue is top-notch. Actors, script, and subject matter all combined to make one hell of a film. It's why you can forgive the occasional turd he charges admission for.

Some claim that it was too lopsided, politically, but I thought it did a decent job of promoting discussion moreso than preaching.
 
2011-11-28 05:30:15 PM
I can think of 4 magnificent movies that are very recent. I of course am speaking of the premiere love story for this generation: The Twilight Saga. You would really be hard pressed to find a better crafted movie from any era.
 
2011-11-28 05:30:41 PM
The demographic that goes to the movies is mostly enthralled with Harry Potter and Twilight these days.
 
2011-11-28 05:30:54 PM

Fano: Amazing Stories


We could always use more anthology shows on television. The only problem is that in the most recent incarnations have just been re-doing classic scripts instead of actually coming up with something new.
 
2011-11-28 05:31:50 PM

edmo: The demographic that goes to the movies is mostly enthralled with Harry Potter and Twilight these days.


The Harry Potter movies are at least pretty decent, there's no shame in liking those.
 
2011-11-28 05:35:16 PM

DamnYankees: edmo: The demographic that goes to the movies is mostly enthralled with Harry Potter and Twilight these days.

The Harry Potter movies are at least pretty decent, there's no shame in liking those.


QFT.
 
2011-11-28 05:35:29 PM
Impressive Fark.

I was completely bewildered and idignant that a group of people could rip Steven frickin Spielberg as a director/producer. That even if he did make some movies they don't like that they couldn't see he is a top 5 director in the history of movie making.

Then I remember I was on Fark.

I bow to you, oh Trolls of Fark. Ya had me for a minute.
 
2011-11-28 05:38:47 PM

edmo: The demographic that goes to the movies is mostly enthralled with Harry Potter and Twilight these days.


Harry Potter is decent entertainment. Link (new window)Twilight is something entirely different.Link (new window)
 
2011-11-28 05:39:09 PM

Jim from Saint Paul: Impressive Fark.

I was completely bewildered and idignant that a group of people could rip Steven frickin Spielberg as a director/producer. That even if he did make some movies they don't like that they couldn't see he is a top 5 director in the history of movie making.

Then I remember I was on Fark.

I bow to you, oh Trolls of Fark. Ya had me for a minute.


From a bottom line, revenue producing director, he is impressive. But so is James Cameron and, deity of choice help us, Michael Bay.
 
2011-11-28 05:40:05 PM

simplicimus: Jim from Saint Paul: Impressive Fark.

I was completely bewildered and idignant that a group of people could rip Steven frickin Spielberg as a director/producer. That even if he did make some movies they don't like that they couldn't see he is a top 5 director in the history of movie making.

Then I remember I was on Fark.

I bow to you, oh Trolls of Fark. Ya had me for a minute.

From a bottom line, revenue producing director, he is impressive. But so is James Cameron and, deity of choice help us, Michael Bay.


Must... not... feed.... troll.... michael...bay...comparison....
 
2011-11-28 05:44:34 PM

Jim from Saint Paul: I was completely bewildered and idignant that a group of people could rip Steven frickin Spielberg as a director/producer. That even if he did make some movies they don't like that they couldn't see he is a top 5 director in the history of movie making.


Is this some kind of reverse trolling attempt? Who here is saying that Spielberg is a shiatty director that's never made a good movie?

Spielberg's made a goodly amount of really great movies. Schlindler's List is my favorite movie of all time. But he's also made some not very good at all movies.
 
2011-11-28 05:45:42 PM

simplicimus: But so is James Cameron and, deity of choice help us, Michael Bay.


James Cameron has made some damn good movies.

Michael Bay is a hack, but he's good at making what he makes: loud, stupid, entertaining movies you have to put zero thought in to, and there is a place for that. Not everything has to be Munich or Schindler's List.
 
2011-11-28 05:51:32 PM

mitchcumstein1: simplicimus: But so is James Cameron and, deity of choice help us, Michael Bay.

James Cameron has made some damn good movies.

Michael Bay is a hack, but he's good at making what he makes: loud, stupid, entertaining movies you have to put zero thought in to, and there is a place for that. Not everything has to be Munich or Schindler's List.


I consider Bay as Ed Woods with a budget. But the bottom line is the bottom line. They don't call it Show Business for nor reason.
 
2011-11-28 05:56:18 PM

Jim from Saint Paul: Impressive Fark.

I was completely bewildered and idignant that a group of people could rip Steven frickin Spielberg as a director/producer. That even if he did make some movies they don't like that they couldn't see he is a top 5 director in the history of movie making.

Then I remember I was on Fark.

I bow to you, oh Trolls of Fark. Ya had me for a minute.



hahahahha.
holy shiatballs. top 5 money making maybe. certainly not top 5 exceptional film makers
 
2011-11-28 05:58:47 PM

Vigorous_Apathy: No good films made in the last two decades...

So when did that PG13 rubbish start, exactly?


Red Dawn was the first PG-13 movie IIRC. So its been around a while
 
2011-11-28 06:01:39 PM
mitchcumstein1:
I think Jurassic Park has aged fantastically. The CGI still looks plausible today almost 20 years on. Hell, it looks more realistic than half the shiat in the Star Wars prequels.

There are probably more model effects in any 5 minutes of Jurassic Park than in the entire Star Wars prequel trilogy. That's why it still looks good. That's why the original trilogy would still be vastly superior even if the story, acting, and directing weren't also vastly superior to the prequels.

And to throw another point of comparison out there, the scene in Fellowship of the Ring where they're hauling ass through Moria always looks incredibly fake to me, moreso on TV, like cartoon running. I don't know whether it was just moviemaking laziness (can't do a few takes of wide shots of the different characters running in all those months of principal photography?) or just bad CGI.


/can highly recommend The Muppets, even if the theater did get terribly dusty at times
//also enjoyed Hugo (in 3D), despite not really knowing what to expect
 
2011-11-28 06:02:09 PM

groppet: Vigorous_Apathy: No good films made in the last two decades...

So when did that PG13 rubbish start, exactly?

Red Dawn was the first PG-13 movie IIRC. So its been around a while


I think Scorsese made a film or two in the last two decades. And that Tarantino guy maybe made a film.
 
2011-11-28 06:04:06 PM

groppet: Red Dawn was the first PG-13 movie IIRC. So its been around a while


and Spielberg thought the idea up to begin with
 
2011-11-28 06:04:21 PM

groppet: Vigorous_Apathy: No good films made in the last two decades...

So when did that PG13 rubbish start, exactly?

Red Dawn was the first PG-13 movie IIRC. So its been around a while


We have PG-13 because of Speilberg I think is the point of his comment. Temple of Doom and Gremlins, and he actually kind of suggested the it.
 
2011-11-28 06:05:59 PM

jdjoker: And to throw another point of comparison out there, the scene in Fellowship of the Ring where they're hauling ass through Moria always looks incredibly fake to me, moreso on TV, like cartoon running. I don't know whether it was just moviemaking laziness (can't do a few takes of wide shots of the different characters running in all those months of principal photography?) or just bad CGI.


The sad part of that is that, IMO, that piece of music - when they first discover Dwarrowdelf - might be the most beautiful piece of the entire trilogy.
 
2011-11-28 06:06:05 PM
Harmony Korine is my favorite director.



cf1.imgobject.com

Fark Spewburg
 
2011-11-28 06:10:05 PM
1) I watched a big chunk of IJ&TTOTCS on Friday just to see the part where he uses a fridge as protection against a nuke and darn it! I missed it again.

2) I watched it on a Sony HD and I gottatellya the picture was so clear it was almost hyper-real; in fact, much of the film looked like a video game.
 
2011-11-28 06:11:03 PM

DamnYankees: Lando Lincoln: There was that War of the Worlds remake that was...oh, yeah, that sucked donkey balls. Who was the director of that one again? That guy should have been fired.

That was an excellent, excellent movie with one fatal flaw (the stupid son thing). But otherwise, brilliantly made movie.


That movie was such a steaming pile of dog shiat, the only reason I even remember it is because it was so terrible that my friend ripped two of the loudest farts I have ever heard to this day and had the whole theater laughing.
 
2011-11-28 06:12:12 PM

Leader O'Cola: Jim from Saint Paul: Impressive Fark.

I was completely bewildered and idignant that a group of people could rip Steven frickin Spielberg as a director/producer. That even if he did make some movies they don't like that they couldn't see he is a top 5 director in the history of movie making.

Then I remember I was on Fark.

I bow to you, oh Trolls of Fark. Ya had me for a minute.


hahahahha.
holy shiatballs. top 5 money making maybe. certainly not top 5 exceptional film makers


Can I have 2 or 3 people you consider better so I can understand where you're coming from then?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Lando Lincoln:
Who here is saying that Spielberg is a shiatty director

kronicfeld: I would ask you the same thing, guy-whose-name-was-associated-with-Super-8.


Lando Lincoln: There was that War of the Worlds remake that was...oh, yeah, that sucked donkey balls. Who was the director of that one again? That guy should have been fired.


coco ebert: Most overrated director ever.


So you and a couple of other dudes?

I mean, if you think he isn't shiatty, then there ya go. When the first thing people post are a guy's failures that means I am on Fark and these people could possibly mean it. All I have to go on is what you tell me.
 
2011-11-28 06:14:42 PM

Jim from Saint Paul: Impressive Fark.

I was completely bewildered and idignant that a group of people could rip Steven frickin Spielberg as a director/producer. That even if he did make some movies they don't like that they couldn't see he is a top 5 director in the history of movie making.

Then I remember I was on Fark.

I bow to you, oh Trolls of Fark. Ya had me for a minute.



blogs.villagevoice.com
 
2011-11-28 06:17:26 PM

dopeydwarf: DamnYankees: dopeydwarf: There have been great movies made over the past couple decades, it's just that Spielberg hasn't made one in a while so he thinks they don't exist. Stevey, watch a good Woody Allen movie and see how it's done. I really love Match Point. Midnight in Paris was pretty damn good too and both were made within the last decade.

Depending how broadly we are defining "great", I think Munich would count as a great movie. It's not an all timer, but if by "great" we mean something like 25 or 50 best of a decade, then Munich would count to me.


Oh yeah, Munich was definitely great. It's a grim one which is why I think a lot of people wouldn't do repeat viewings, but I was on the edge of my seat throughout it.


Go see 'The Debt' with Helen MIrren. Filmed 2-3 years ago and released a few months back.

Better than Munich and I own Munich.

DamnYankees: Lando Lincoln: There was that War of the Worlds remake that was...oh, yeah, that sucked donkey balls. Who was the director of that one again? That guy should have been fired.

That was an excellent, excellent movie with one fatal flaw (the stupid son thing). But otherwise, brilliantly made movie.


Ah, no, it wasn't.
 
2011-11-28 06:20:51 PM

mitchcumstein1: dopeydwarf: mitchcumstein1: dopeydwarf: mitchcumstein1: dopeydwarf: mitchcumstein1: DamnYankees:

You dare discount Match Point? For shame.

That would be a hit. Cassandra' Dream, for example would be a miss. Scoop would be an abortion.


You shan't throw the baby out with the bath water.

Not saying you should, but to saying that Speilberg should go to Woody Allen to better know how to make an entertaining film is crazy talk.

I think Jurassic Park has aged fantastically. The CGI still looks plausible today almost 20 years on. Hell, it looks more realistic than half the shiat in the Star Wars prequels.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on Saving Private Ryan.



You're going on about the CGI when I'm talking about the story. The story hasn't aged well and is, at best, just a popcorn flick.
 
2011-11-28 06:21:07 PM

douchebag/hater: dopeydwarf: DamnYankees: dopeydwarf: There have been great movies made over the past couple decades, it's just that Spielberg hasn't made one in a while so he thinks they don't exist. Stevey, watch a good Woody Allen movie and see how it's done. I really love Match Point. Midnight in Paris was pretty damn good too and both were made within the last decade.

Depending how broadly we are defining "great", I think Munich would count as a great movie. It's not an all timer, but if by "great" we mean something like 25 or 50 best of a decade, then Munich would count to me.


Oh yeah, Munich was definitely great. It's a grim one which is why I think a lot of people wouldn't do repeat viewings, but I was on the edge of my seat throughout it.

Go see 'The Debt' with Helen MIrren. Filmed 2-3 years ago and released a few months back.

Better than Munich and I own Munich.

DamnYankees: Lando Lincoln: There was that War of the Worlds remake that was...oh, yeah, that sucked donkey balls. Who was the director of that one again? That guy should have been fired.

That was an excellent, excellent movie with one fatal flaw (the stupid son thing). But otherwise, brilliantly made movie.

Ah, no, it wasn't.


Gotta chime in. No, it wasn't. Abandoned plot lines all over the place.
 
2011-11-28 06:27:16 PM

Jim from Saint Paul: Can I have 2 or 3 people you consider better so I can understand where you're coming from then?



Lang
Hitchcock
Kurosawa
Clouzot
Bergman
Leone
Kubrick
Tarkovsy
Scorsese
.... to name a few
 
2011-11-28 06:30:33 PM

jdjoker: And to throw another point of comparison out there, the scene in Fellowship of the Ring where they're hauling ass through Moria always looks incredibly fake to me, moreso on TV, like cartoon running. I don't know whether it was just moviemaking laziness (can't do a few takes of wide shots of the different characters running in all those months of principal photography?) or just bad CGI.


I know exactly what you're talking about. It reminded me of those crappy auto-generated dungeons from Oblivion that all looked the same.

douchebag/hater: DamnYankees: Lando Lincoln: There was that War of the Worlds remake that was...oh, yeah, that sucked donkey balls. Who was the director of that one again? That guy should have been fired.

That was an excellent, excellent movie with one fatal flaw (the stupid son thing). But otherwise, brilliantly made movie.

Ah, no, it wasn't.


I will say the only good thing I remember from that movie was the noise the alien walkers made when they first appear. It was one of the scariest noises I'd heard (like thousands of cars being crushed together) and I was pretty impressed by that. Then Dakota Fanning started screaming, and that became the scariest noise I'd ever heard (and not in a cool way).
 
2011-11-28 06:31:14 PM
what no A2A scene from Requiem?

/spellcheck
 
2011-11-28 06:32:41 PM
anyone who thinks that Spielberg isn't one of the greatest directors of the last four decades is, without any shadow of a doubt, a complete farking retard.

that having been said, his comments are almost inconceivably hypocritical. please reference the south park, raping of indiana jones, post above. that is, without a doubt, a complete example of everything that spielberg laments. on it's own, it is a shiatty movie. in the context of the series, it is an abomination.

kudos to spielberg for the majority of his resume. shame on him for the utter hypocrisy of that interview.
 
2011-11-28 06:33:22 PM

Jim from Saint Paul: Can I have 2 or 3 people you consider better so I can understand where you're coming from then?


Jim from Saint Paul: Can I have 2 or 3 people you consider better so I can understand where you're coming from then?



Lang
Hitchcock
Kurosawa
Clouzot
Bergman
Lumet
Leone
Kubrick
Tarkovsy
Scorsese
Kieslowski
.... to name a few hell, I'd even start factoring in real yo-yo career guys like Friedkin, Polanski, the Cohens, etc...
 
2011-11-28 06:34:05 PM
ehhh, farking site or my ISP timed out, and I ended up with an incomplete double post.
sorry
 
2011-11-28 06:34:13 PM

dopeydwarf: Jim from Saint Paul: Impressive Fark.

I was completely bewildered and idignant that a group of people could rip Steven frickin Spielberg as a director/producer. That even if he did make some movies they don't like that they couldn't see he is a top 5 director in the history of movie making.

Then I remember I was on Fark.

I bow to you, oh Trolls of Fark. Ya had me for a minute.


[blogs.villagevoice.com image 225x209]


How does one rate the best directors of all time?
 
2011-11-28 06:37:05 PM

Mangoose: dopeydwarf: Jim from Saint Paul: Impressive Fark.

I was completely bewildered and idignant that a group of people could rip Steven frickin Spielberg as a director/producer. That even if he did make some movies they don't like that they couldn't see he is a top 5 director in the history of movie making.

Then I remember I was on Fark.

I bow to you, oh Trolls of Fark. Ya had me for a minute.


[blogs.villagevoice.com image 225x209]

How does one rate the best directors of all time?


Simple. Do you remember the film 5 years later?
 
2011-11-28 06:38:23 PM

dopeydwarf: mitchcumstein1: dopeydwarf: mitchcumstein1: dopeydwarf: mitchcumstein1: dopeydwarf: mitchcumstein1: DamnYankees:

You dare discount Match Point? For shame.

That would be a hit. Cassandra' Dream, for example would be a miss. Scoop would be an abortion.


You shan't throw the baby out with the bath water.

Not saying you should, but to saying that Speilberg should go to Woody Allen to better know how to make an entertaining film is crazy talk.

I think Jurassic Park has aged fantastically. The CGI still looks plausible today almost 20 years on. Hell, it looks more realistic than half the shiat in the Star Wars prequels.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on Saving Private Ryan.


You're going on about the CGI when I'm talking about the story. The story hasn't aged well and is, at best, just a popcorn flick.


Well, since the stars of the movie really are the dinosaurs I would say that CGI was fairly important. When you say it ages badly that's what I think you mean, that story is kind of timeless. Two little kids get to hang out with dinosaurs and get rescued by Sam Neill and Jeff Goldblum when things go badly? How the fark doesn't age well? It was always a popcorn flick, what deeper meaning where you looking for in a movie about bringing dinosaurs back to life?
 
2011-11-28 06:39:28 PM

kronicfeld: I would ask you the same thing, guy-whose-name-was-associated-with-Super-8.


Hey, I liked Super 8!
 
2011-11-28 07:01:43 PM

Mangoose: dopeydwarf: Jim from Saint Paul: Impressive Fark.

I was completely bewildered and idignant that a group of people could rip Steven frickin Spielberg as a director/producer. That even if he did make some movies they don't like that they couldn't see he is a top 5 director in the history of movie making.

Then I remember I was on Fark.

I bow to you, oh Trolls of Fark. Ya had me for a minute.


[blogs.villagevoice.com image 225x209]

How does one rate the best directors of all time?


By height?
 
2011-11-28 07:02:19 PM
i151.photobucket.com
Watched this other night. I don't want you to have nice things
 
2011-11-28 07:06:07 PM

Fano: Mangoose: dopeydwarf: Jim from Saint Paul: Impressive Fark.

I was completely bewildered and idignant that a group of people could rip Steven frickin Spielberg as a director/producer. That even if he did make some movies they don't like that they couldn't see he is a top 5 director in the history of movie making.

Then I remember I was on Fark.

I bow to you, oh Trolls of Fark. Ya had me for a minute.


[blogs.villagevoice.com image 225x209]

How does one rate the best directors of all time?

By height?


By Fark memes.
 
2011-11-28 07:14:37 PM
turn your TV Steve, it's where great stuff is happening now

wgtccdn.wegotthiscovered.netdna-cdn.com
 
2011-11-28 07:17:43 PM
Spielberg as a director in theaters, ratings from Rotten Tomatoes
100 - Jaws (1975)
98 - E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial (1982)
97 - Schindler's List (1993)
96 - Catch Me If You Can (2002)
95 - Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977)
94 - Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)
93 - Saving Private Ryan (1998)
92 - The Sugarland Express (1974)
92 - Minority Report (2002)
89 - Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989)
89 - Jurassic Park (1993)
88 - The Color Purple (1985)
86 - The Adventures of Tintin (2011)
85 - Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984)
81 - Empire of the Sun (1987)
78 - Munich (2005)
77 - Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008)
76 - Amistad (1997)
74 - War of the Worlds (2005)
73 - A.I. Artificial Intelligence (2001)
61 - Always (1989)
60 - The Terminal (2004)
52 - The Lost World - Jurassic Park (1997)
33 - 1941 (1979)
29 - Hook (1991)

Suck it, haters. He has obviously made some crap, but the great far, far, outweighs it.
 
2011-11-28 07:21:51 PM
www.ckohler.net
 
2011-11-28 07:24:44 PM
Here's my definition of a great movie/work of art.

When you can watch it over and over and still enjoy it as if you were a kid again. Hell even The Great Pumpkin Charlie Brown qualifies.

I've seen some really good movies over the last decade...but very few I would want to watch again. Once is good enough for me. Vicky Christina Barcelona? Yeah, good shiate...Woody Allen's a genius blah blah blah...but Christ I definitely won't be asking to see a copy of it on my deathbed. That's for Raiders of the Lost Ark or something.

Movies today have no heart. They're just a bunch of contrived messes with good-looking people more interested in being stars than being actors. Add to that unnatural CGI designed more to showoff the power of your renderfarm...and you've got a recipe for never ending hokeyness.

The Enterprise escaping spacedock in Star Trek III looks 10 times more realistic than any sweeping unrealistic camera shot of a million-man orc army.
 
2011-11-28 07:24:57 PM

The Lone Talbot: Suck it, haters. He has obviously made some crap, but the great far, far, outweighs it.


average
79.52

not very impressive, a C+ filmmaker
 
2011-11-28 07:27:15 PM
Yes, he's laid some eggs, but the man can say what he wants.

The most recent films that I can say were 'great':
Schindler's List (1993)
GoodFellas (1990)
 
2011-11-28 07:27:26 PM

Leader O'Cola: The Lone Talbot: Suck it, haters. He has obviously made some crap, but the great far, far, outweighs it.

average
79.52

not very impressive, a C+ filmmaker


you should try that with some other directors. compare. the results might surprise you.
 
2011-11-28 07:28:07 PM
Spielberg is not and never has been a good director. Welcome to Fark.

--------

I'm not the biggest Spielberg fan, mostly because I like darker and more adult-themed films than what he has historically created. But to say that he is not one of the greatest and most innovative directors and producers in the history of film (be it top 5, 15 or 25) is a huge disservice. The number of iconic moments film under his watch is practically countless.
 
2011-11-28 07:29:27 PM
I guess he missed Lesbian Spank Inferno II
 
2011-11-28 07:29:46 PM

GoHomeAndGetYourShinebox: The number of iconic moments filmed under his watch is practically countless.


:-/
 
2011-11-28 07:33:26 PM

SmitetheRighteous: The Enterprise escaping spacedock in Star Trek III looks 10 times more realistic than any sweeping unrealistic camera shot of a million-man orc army.


I wouldn't go that far.
I think it's more a case of movie-makers not knowing what to do with the unlimited power of CGI. Back in ST3, you had models and sets with certain costs, and you knew what you could get away with as far as money was concerned. That left the rest of the focus to making the most of what you had. When what you have is limitless, or at least, conceivably limitless, you spend more time making the content than what you do with that content. Pretty much the death knell of the Star Wars prequels.
If ST3 were made today, JJ Abrams would probably have half of the Federation in a wild chase of the Enterprise out of the solar system, with lots of ships, explosions, and CGI budget. It would have looked amazing. But at the same time, wouldn't have shown off the finesse of Kirk and crew working with just their wits.
 
2011-11-28 07:35:39 PM

DamnYankees: mitchcumstein1: DamnYankees: mitchcumstein1: Hook, Jurassic Park, Saving Private Ryan, Schindler's List, Minority Report and Munich have all been made within the last couple decades. Catch Me If You Can was fun if not great.

One of these things is not like the other...

I was 12 when that movie came out, it was made to appeal to me. I saw it with my grandfather, he died shortly thereafter, it will always have a soft spot in my heart.

That's cool - I liked that movie a lot when I was a kid also. But its objectively not a very good movie.

Good music, though.


My opinion of Hook has actually gotten better over the years. It was gaudy and over produced, but watching it through the prism of today's movies, it's somewhat quaint and old school. No overload on CGI. The sets are real sets. Every single background character is an extra, not CGI. No Michael Bay-style rapid editing, you can follow the action. It's perhaps the last time we got to see a spectacle of that magnitude that isn't 90% digitized. I wonder if that's why Spielberg gave Michael Bay all that movey to make the Transformers movies. To make Hook (and 1941) look good by comparison.
 
2011-11-28 07:36:58 PM
We're going to biatch about Spielberg, now?

Terrific.

Some of his works are overrated, but he's not a *bad* director.

Besides, he made Jaws, so homeboy gets a free pass on less notable works.



The Lone Talbot: Spielberg as a director in theaters, ratings from Rotten Tomatoes
100 - Jaws (1975)
98 - E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial (1982)
97 - Schindler's List (1993)
96 - Catch Me If You Can (2002)
95 - Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977)
94 - Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)
93 - Saving Private Ryan (1998)
92 - The Sugarland Express (1974)
92 - Minority Report (2002)
89 - Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989)
89 - Jurassic Park (1993)
88 - The Color Purple (1985)
86 - The Adventures of Tintin (2011)
85 - Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984)
81 - Empire of the Sun (1987)
78 - Munich (2005)
77 - Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008)
76 - Amistad (1997)
74 - War of the Worlds (2005)
73 - A.I. Artificial Intelligence (2001)
61 - Always (1989)
60 - The Terminal (2004)
52 - The Lost World - Jurassic Park (1997)
33 - 1941 (1979)
29 - Hook (1991)


Hook ranked below 1941?

...

Yeah, I'll accept that.
 
2011-11-28 07:38:05 PM

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Hook ranked below 1941?

...

Yeah, I'll accept that.


You're obviously biased.
 
2011-11-28 07:45:10 PM

mitchcumstein1: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Hook ranked below 1941?

...

Yeah, I'll accept that.

You're obviously biased.


Well considering the talent he had to work with, and the performances he wound up with, yeah, that film sucks.
 
2011-11-28 07:46:26 PM

Lando Lincoln: DamnYankees: I don;t know what to say. The movie itself is not amazing, but the craftsmanship really is. Spielberg knows how to tell stories.

Yeah, "craftsmanship." As in, "Hey, wouldn't it be AWESOME if we had a scene where the aliens attacked a ferry boat full of cars and people and the boat started tipping over and the cars were all rolling around and smashing up people and stuff? And people DROWNING in the cars! Yeah, I know it doesn't make a goddamn bit of sense to have a ferry boat full of cars that don't work. I mean, why wouldn't all the people just push the dead cars off of the ferry boat and then an extra thousand people would be able to be loaded onto the ferry boat every trip? If we were to write this sensibly, then we wouldn't have that AWESOME SCENE where the cars go flying into the water and shiat!"

"Craftsmanship." Otherwise known as "eye candy."


Or as in, "hey, wouldn't it be AWESOME if when the mothership finally appears in CE3K, instead of descending from space, it rises from behind Devil's Tower. Yeah, I know it doesn't make a goddamn bit of sense to have the mothership rising from behind the mountain. I mean, it's not like there is a mothership-sized hole where it could conceal itself away from the US government which had station itself there for several days beforehand, so that it can make it's presence know when the time was right. If we were to write this sensibly, then we wouldn't have that AWESOME SCENE where the mothership rises from behind Devil's Tower and shiat!"

/Spielberg readily admitted in the behind-the-scenes feature that made no sense but looked cool
 
2011-11-28 07:47:20 PM
I enjoy quite a few of Spielberg's films but find myself less impressed by his work in the past decade or so. Great director whose talents seem to be shifting more toward that of producer (of which he does a very good job as well).

All that said, I don't think he could even crack the top 10* list of directors of all time, despite all the love he got in the media during the 90s.

* 'Course, lists like these are highly subjective to begin with, but still...
 
2011-11-28 07:49:54 PM

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: We're going to biatch about Spielberg, now?

Terrific.

Some of his works are overrated, but he's not a *bad* director.

Besides, he made Jaws, so homeboy gets a free pass on less notable works.


...
Hook ranked below 1941?


Yeah, I'll accept that.


I'll take Hook and 1941 over Lost World, Crystal Skull or Last Crusade any day of the week. Temple of Doom edges them out because of the Club Obi Wan scene and the mine car scene.

/haven't seen Always since it came out but can picture that not holding up at all
//thought it was okay when I saw it but paled compared to Field of Dreams which came out the same year
 
2011-11-28 07:51:19 PM
But despite his strong views, Spielberg, who was born in Cincinnati, Ohio in 1946, maintained that even bad films were capable of offering a glimmer of genius.

He insisted that it was "rude to leave a movie" no matter how disappointing it proved, claiming that "clearly, someone was passionate enough to make it".


Know how I know Spielberg has never seen a Friedberg & Seltzer movie?
 
2011-11-28 07:56:55 PM

R Kelly's Doo Doo Butter: I am having a hard time thinking of anything like this doing well recently.


Doing well like a blockbuster? No. But the entire genre of American Pie, Can't Hardly Wait, Sixteen Candles, Superbad, etc etc etc (and Project X next spring) are inexpensive to produce and pull in the high school and just-graduated-high-school crowds. Like I said, it's cynical, but it works. Studios wouldn't crank them out over and over and over if they didn't fit a profitable niche.
 
2011-11-28 08:02:43 PM

The Lone Talbot: Spielberg as a director in theaters, ratings from Rotten Tomatoes
100 - Jaws (1975)
98 - E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial (1982)
97 - Schindler's List (1993)
96 - Catch Me If You Can (2002)
95 - Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977)
94 - Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)
93 - Saving Private Ryan (1998)
92 - The Sugarland Express (1974)
92 - Minority Report (2002)
89 - Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989)
89 - Jurassic Park (1993)
88 - The Color Purple (1985)
86 - The Adventures of Tintin (2011)
85 - Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984)
81 - Empire of the Sun (1987)
78 - Munich (2005)
77 - Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008)
76 - Amistad (1997)
74 - War of the Worlds (2005)
73 - A.I. Artificial Intelligence (2001)
61 - Always (1989)
60 - The Terminal (2004)
52 - The Lost World - Jurassic Park (1997)
33 - 1941 (1979)
29 - Hook (1991)

Suck it, haters. He has obviously made some crap, but the great far, far, outweighs it.


There's 5 or those movies in there that makes him superior to close to 100% of any director alive or dead.... suck it, indeed, haters
 
2011-11-28 08:05:30 PM

mitchcumstein1: dopeydwarf: mitchcumstein1: dopeydwarf: mitchcumstein1: dopeydwarf: mitchcumstein1: dopeydwarf: mitchcumstein1: DamnYankees:

You dare discount Match Point? For shame.

That would be a hit. Cassandra' Dream, for example would be a miss. Scoop would be an abortion.


You shan't throw the baby out with the bath water.

Not saying you should, but to saying that Speilberg should go to Woody Allen to better know how to make an entertaining film is crazy talk.

I think Jurassic Park has aged fantastically. The CGI still looks plausible today almost 20 years on. Hell, it looks more realistic than half the shiat in the Star Wars prequels.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on Saving Private Ryan.


You're going on about the CGI when I'm talking about the story. The story hasn't aged well and is, at best, just a popcorn flick.

Well, since the stars of the movie really are the dinosaurs I would say that CGI was fairly important. When you say it ages badly that's what I think you mean, that story is kind of timeless. Two little kids get to hang out with dinosaurs and get rescued by Sam Neill and Jeff Goldblum when things go badly? How the fark doesn't age well? It was always a popcorn flick, what deeper meaning where you looking for in a movie about bringing dinosaurs back to life?



Timeless? Come on. It's a trite story wrapped within "OH WOW, DINOSAURS!" If that still gets you off then have at it, but it's pretty hollow for me.
 
2011-11-28 08:10:04 PM
mitchcumstein1: You're obviously biased.

Pro-Mifune, anti-Julia Roberts?

You're frogdamn right I'm biased.


gunga galunga: I'll take Hook and 1941 over Lost World, Crystal Skull or Last Crusade any day of the week. Temple of Doom edges them out because of the Club Obi Wan scene and the mine car scene.

/haven't seen Always since it came out but can picture that not holding up at all
//thought it was okay when I saw it but paled compared to Field of Dreams which came out the same year


I saw you mention Crystal Skull and Last Crusade, so I naturally thought, "PLEASE don't tell me he's going there with Temple."

You didn't. That's good on ya. I love me some Temple.


simplicimus: Well considering the talent he had to work with, and the performances he wound up with, yeah, that film sucks.

Bob Hoskins deserved better than Hook.


The Chewbacca Defense: All that said, I don't think he could even crack the top 10* list of directors of all time, despite all the love he got in the media during the 90s.

I could agree with this.

Spielberg is solid, but I'd hesitate to say ZOMG 10 BEST OF ALL TIME solid.


* 'Course, lists like these are highly subjective to begin with, but still...

Granted, aye...
 
2011-11-28 08:10:22 PM

T.rex: Yes, he's laid some eggs, but the man can say what he wants.

The most recent films that I can say were 'great':
Schindler's List (1993)
GoodFellas (1990)


Scorsese directed GoodFellas.
 
2011-11-28 08:10:57 PM
Never mind, reading comprehension fail on my part.
 
2011-11-28 08:16:55 PM

Galileo's Daughter: T.rex: Yes, he's laid some eggs, but the man can say what he wants.

The most recent films that I can say were 'great':
Schindler's List (1993)
GoodFellas (1990)

Scorsese directed GoodFellas.


Yes, i'm aware of that. I saw it, theatrically twice, when i was in 7th grade.
Scorcese is in a position to criticize modern film, as well.

I'll add Malcolm X to the list... (and yes, i realize that wasn't Speilberg, either).
 
2011-11-28 08:19:42 PM

Galileo's Daughter: T.rex: Yes, he's laid some eggs, but the man can say what he wants.

The most recent films that I can say were 'great':
Schindler's List (1993)
GoodFellas (1990)

Scorsese directed GoodFellas.


He is one heck of a director, in that he can get great performances out of his cast.
 
2011-11-28 08:20:15 PM

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: gunga galunga: I'll take Hook and 1941 over Lost World, Crystal Skull or Last Crusade any day of the week. Temple of Doom edges them out because of the Club Obi Wan scene and the mine car scene.

/haven't seen Always since it came out but can picture that not holding up at all
//thought it was okay when I saw it but paled compared to Field of Dreams which came out the same year

I saw you mention Crystal Skull and Last Crusade, so I naturally thought, "PLEASE don't tell me he's going there with Temple."

You didn't. That's good on ya. I love me some Temple..


The two aforementioned scenes are perhaps my favorite two scenes from the entire series. The movie is, as a whole, certainly not the masterpiece that Raiders was but those sequences (the mine car race was supposed to have been in Raiders) were truly inspired.
 
2011-11-28 08:24:05 PM

gunga galunga: The two aforementioned scenes are perhaps my favorite two scenes from the entire series. The movie is, as a whole, certainly not the masterpiece that Raiders was but those sequences (the mine car race was supposed to have been in Raiders) were truly inspired.


Temple is ruined from the start because the burning urge to reach into the screen and strangle Kate Capshaw is just too overpoweringly distracting.

Also, Short Round's squeaky screechy voice is also heinous counterpoint to any of the rubbish Capshaw was spewing/screaming.
 
2011-11-28 08:25:54 PM

dopeydwarf: DamnYankees: dopeydwarf: There have been great movies made over the past couple decades, it's just that Spielberg hasn't made one in a while so he thinks they don't exist. Stevey, watch a good Woody Allen movie and see how it's done. I really love Match Point. Midnight in Paris was pretty damn good too and both were made within the last decade.

Depending how broadly we are defining "great", I think Munich would count as a great movie. It's not an all timer, but if by "great" we mean something like 25 or 50 best of a decade, then Munich would count to me.


Oh yeah, Munich was definitely great. It's a grim one which is why I think a lot of people wouldn't do repeat viewings, but I was on the edge of my seat throughout it.


Bored shiatless. Munich was a woeful piece of garbage. Overly long, terribly paced. there were 11 people to kill and 90 minutes in 3 were dead. I didn't care about their accented ramblings, nor did i find any of it believeable, but most of all I thought if it keeps up like this I'm going to be here for 5 more hours.
 
2011-11-28 08:33:09 PM

The Lone Talbot: you should try that with some other directors. compare. the results might surprise you.


like the ones I listed?
93 lang
88 hitchcock
85 kurosawa
95 clouzot
86 bergman
88 leone
92 kubrick
71 lumet
91 tarkovsky
91 kiselowski


yeh, lumet fails, but that's largely because he kept working long after he apparently should have, or else he was hard up for cash to make some of those clunkers....
 
2011-11-28 08:36:25 PM

T.rex: Yes, he's laid some eggs, but the man can say what he wants.

The most recent films that I can say were 'great':
Schindler's List (1993)
GoodFellas (1990)


Dude, you need to see more movies. Just in the past few years, There Will Be Blood and No Country for Old Men are all time classics.
 
2011-11-28 08:40:04 PM

nigeman: dopeydwarf: DamnYankees: dopeydwarf: There have been great movies made over the past couple decades, it's just that Spielberg hasn't made one in a while so he thinks they don't exist. Stevey, watch a good Woody Allen movie and see how it's done. I really love Match Point. Midnight in Paris was pretty damn good too and both were made within the last decade.

Depending how broadly we are defining "great", I think Munich would count as a great movie. It's not an all timer, but if by "great" we mean something like 25 or 50 best of a decade, then Munich would count to me.


Oh yeah, Munich was definitely great. It's a grim one which is why I think a lot of people wouldn't do repeat viewings, but I was on the edge of my seat throughout it.

Bored shiatless. Munich was a woeful piece of garbage. Overly long, terribly paced. there were 11 people to kill and 90 minutes in 3 were dead. I didn't care about their accented ramblings, nor did i find any of it believeable, but most of all I thought if it keeps up like this I'm going to be here for 5 more hours.



Plus the real-life story of how the assassinations panned out is a lot more interesting, and they didn't use it.
 
2011-11-28 08:40:41 PM

Leader O'Cola: The Lone Talbot: you should try that with some other directors. compare. the results might surprise you.

like the ones I listed?
93 lang
88 hitchcock
85 kurosawa
95 clouzot
86 bergman
88 leone
92 kubrick
71 lumet
91 tarkovsky
91 kiselowski


yeh, lumet fails, but that's largely because he kept working long after he apparently should have, or else he was hard up for cash to make some of those clunkers....


12 angry men and Network are iconic. These films will be remembered. Not a bad resume.
 
2011-11-28 08:41:00 PM
DamnYankees: Dude, you need to see more movies. Just in the past few years, There Will Be Blood and No Country for Old Men are all time classics.

Also, this. Superb movies, those.


gunga galunga: The two aforementioned scenes are perhaps my favorite two scenes from the entire series. The movie is, as a whole, certainly not the masterpiece that Raiders was but those sequences (the mine car race was supposed to have been in Raiders) were truly inspired.

The opening to Temple was flat-out awesome. And while the movie as a whole can't compare to Raiders, it's still a hell of a ride.

I could've done without the blood drinking stuff, but I don't have a lot of complaints about that movie.

Yeah, yeah, I know, Kate Capshaw.
 
2011-11-28 08:48:40 PM

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: DamnYankees: Dude, you need to see more movies. Just in the past few years, There Will Be Blood and No Country for Old Men are all time classics.

Also, this. Superb movies, those.


gunga galunga: The two aforementioned scenes are perhaps my favorite two scenes from the entire series. The movie is, as a whole, certainly not the masterpiece that Raiders was but those sequences (the mine car race was supposed to have been in Raiders) were truly inspired.

The opening to Temple was flat-out awesome. And while the movie as a whole can't compare to Raiders, it's still a hell of a ride.

I could've done without the blood drinking stuff, but I don't have a lot of complaints about that movie.

Yeah, yeah, I know, Kate Capshaw.Jonathan Ke Quan


seriously? People bagging on Temple? The opening bar scene, the "nice try, Lao Che", the plane ride, the castle, the fist-fights, the tunnels, the bridge, THE FREAkING BRIDGE SCENE!!!... It wasnt movie perfection like Raiders, but damn, it was close
 
2011-11-28 08:49:41 PM

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: We're going to biatch about Spielberg, now?

Terrific.

Some of his works are overrated, but he's not a *bad* director.

Besides, he made Jaws, so homeboy gets a free pass on less notable works.



The Lone Talbot: Spielberg as a director in theaters, ratings from Rotten Tomatoes
100 - Jaws (1975)
98 - E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial (1982)
97 - Schindler's List (1993)
96 - Catch Me If You Can (2002)
95 - Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977)
94 - Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)
93 - Saving Private Ryan (1998)
92 - The Sugarland Express (1974)
92 - Minority Report (2002)
89 - Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989)
89 - Jurassic Park (1993)
88 - The Color Purple (1985)
86 - The Adventures of Tintin (2011)
85 - Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984)
81 - Empire of the Sun (1987)
78 - Munich (2005)
77 - Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008)
76 - Amistad (1997)
74 - War of the Worlds (2005)
73 - A.I. Artificial Intelligence (2001)
61 - Always (1989)
60 - The Terminal (2004)
52 - The Lost World - Jurassic Park (1997)
33 - 1941 (1979)
29 - Hook (1991)

Hook ranked below 1941?

...

Yeah, I'll accept that.


Raiders of the Lost Ark is below Catch Me if You Can? There is indeed no accounting for taste.
 
2011-11-28 09:01:11 PM
crashdavis18: Raiders of the Lost Ark is below Catch Me if You Can? There is indeed no accounting for taste.

I didn't even notice.

Yeah, that ain't right.

Hell NO, that ain't right.


HappyHarryHardOn: seriously? People bagging on Temple? The opening bar scene, the "nice try, Lao Che", the plane ride, the castle, the fist-fights, the tunnels, the bridge, THE FREAkING BRIDGE SCENE!!!... It wasnt movie perfection like Raiders, but damn, it was close

I don't understand why Temple gets bagged on as much as it does (okay, there's Kate Capshaw), but it's still a damn good time.

Diff'rent strokes to move the world and all that.
 
2011-11-28 09:03:58 PM

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: The opening to Temple was flat-out awesome. And while the movie as a whole can't compare to Raiders, it's still a hell of a ride.

I could've done without the blood drinking stuff, but I don't have a lot of complaints about that movie.

Yeah, yeah, I know, Kate Capshaw.


I don't get people hating on Last Crusade - I LOVE that movie. All of those movies are great. IMO, Raiders is the best, but not by much over Last Crusade.
 
2011-11-28 09:17:18 PM

The Lone Talbot: Spielberg as a director in theaters, ratings from Rotten Tomatoes
100 - Jaws (1975)
98 - E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial (1982)
97 - Schindler's List (1993)
96 - Catch Me If You Can (2002)
95 - Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977)
94 - Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)
93 - Saving Private Ryan (1998)
92 - The Sugarland Express (1974)
92 - Minority Report (2002)
89 - Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989)
89 - Jurassic Park (1993)
88 - The Color Purple (1985)
86 - The Adventures of Tintin (2011)
85 - Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984)
81 - Empire of the Sun (1987)
78 - Munich (2005)
77 - Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008)
76 - Amistad (1997)
74 - War of the Worlds (2005)
73 - A.I. Artificial Intelligence (2001)
61 - Always (1989)
60 - The Terminal (2004)
52 - The Lost World - Jurassic Park (1997)
33 - 1941 (1979)
29 - Hook (1991)

Suck it, haters. He has obviously made some crap, but the great far, far, outweighs it.


Who are the 6% of critics idiots that don't recommend Raiders of the Lost Ark? It's the greatest movie ever made.
 
2011-11-28 09:22:00 PM
unknown music = hipster bullshiat
unknown movies/directors = fark favorites

got it
 
2011-11-28 09:44:08 PM

dopeydwarf: Timeless? Come on. It's a trite story wrapped within "OH WOW, DINOSAURS!" If that still gets you off then have at it, but it's pretty hollow for me.


It does, and I will.

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Pro-Mifune, anti-Julia Roberts?


Oh, I forgot she was Tink. Carry on.
 
2011-11-28 10:12:22 PM

Leader O'Cola: The Lone Talbot: you should try that with some other directors. compare. the results might surprise you.

like the ones I listed?
93 lang
88 hitchcock
85 kurosawa
95 clouzot
86 bergman
88 leone
92 kubrick
71 lumet
91 tarkovsky
91 kiselowski


yeh, lumet fails, but that's largely because he kept working long after he apparently should have, or else he was hard up for cash to make some of those clunkers....


Where the love for Billy Wilder?

1960 The Apartment
1959 Some Like It Hot
1957 Witness for the Prosecution
1957 Love in the Afternoon
1955 The Seven Year Itch
1954 Sabrina
1953 Stalag 17
1951 Ace in the Hole
1950 Sunset Blvd.
1945 The Lost Weekend
1944 Double Indemnity

I'm the biggest Kubrick honk there is, but Wilder has a seriously overlooked
body of work. These works have a soul, and they stay with you.
 
2011-11-28 10:19:39 PM

WhoIsWillo: Someone ought to tell the gentlemen to go to his multiplex and see The Muppets.


QFT
 
2011-11-28 10:24:15 PM

drewsclues: unknown music = hipster bullshiat
unknown movies/directors = fark favorites

got it


farking KUBRICK, Hitchcock, Kurosawa and Bergman are unknown?

chanarchive.org

Also go watch Kieslowski's Color Trilogy, you'll learn a thing or two about cinema.
 
2011-11-28 11:00:24 PM

simplicimus:
Law Abiding Citizen was IMHO very well done.


Really?
 
2011-11-28 11:05:51 PM

Joey Jo Jo Jr Shabadu: simplicimus:
Law Abiding Citizen was IMHO very well done.

Really?


Well, it kept me in suspense, which is rare.
 
2011-11-28 11:09:59 PM

rocky_howard: farking KUBRICK, Hitchcock, Kurosawa and Bergman are unknown?


lol. sad, isn't it ?
 
2011-11-28 11:15:29 PM

rocky_howard:

Also go watch Kieslowski's Color Trilogy, you'll learn a thing or two about cinema.


Kieslowski's 'Red' is a superb film. Highly recommended.
 
2011-11-28 11:24:32 PM

kanesays: rocky_howard:

Also go watch Kieslowski's Color Trilogy, you'll learn a thing or two about cinema.

Kieslowski's 'Red' is a superb film. Highly recommended.


the whole trilogy is astounding, I still find myself watching Double Life of Veronique more often though even though techinically it may be a lesser film(s). Something about the Bergman-esqueism of focusing so much on Jacob's face. or...
maybe its because I'm waiting on Criterion to replace my 'White' Disc for its audio problems.
 
2011-11-28 11:40:54 PM
"Where are the great movies?" asks the director of Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, 1941, Always, Temple of Doom, Hook, The Lost World, Munich, War of the Worlds, The Terminal.

He's made great movies, but he's been responsible for his fair share of schlock. Like almost every director (even many great ones).
 
2011-11-28 11:46:10 PM

velvet_fog: "Where are the great movies?" asks the director of Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, 1941, Always, Temple of Doom, Hook, The Lost World, Munich, War of the Worlds, The Terminal.

He's made great movies, but he's been responsible for his fair share of schlock. Like almost every director (even many great ones).


If anything, he can be partially blamed for Hollywood's reliance on the summer blockbuster, after the success of Jaws and Raiders.
 
2011-11-28 11:50:55 PM

velvet_fog: "Where are the great movies?" asks the director of Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, 1941, Always, Temple of Doom, Hook, The Lost World, Munich, War of the Worlds, The Terminal.

He's made great movies, but he's been responsible for his fair share of schlock. Like almost every director (even many great ones).


Munich is schlock?
 
2011-11-29 12:10:34 AM

Leader O'Cola: rocky_howard: farking KUBRICK, Hitchcock, Kurosawa and Bergman are unknown?

lol. sad, isn't it ?


I know. If it was the aforementioned Harmony Korine, I'd understand. Even a Wes Anderson. But the motherfarking four columns of cinema as an artform? Yeah, that guy is trolling or ignorantly pretentious.

kanesays: rocky_howard:

Also go watch Kieslowski's Color Trilogy, you'll learn a thing or two about cinema.

Kieslowski's 'Red' is a superb film. Highly recommended.


Yup, that's my favorite of the three.

I need to see Blind Chance from him, but haven't got the time to track it down. Got interested after learning that it was where Run, Lola, Run got its structure from.
 
2011-11-29 12:32:45 AM

mitchcumstein1: Yes, Steven Spielberg has never made a good movie.


He has made some good movies, but I don't think he has made movies as good as, say, the best Coen Brothers films or the best David Lynch films or the best films of the directors of the 80s/90s/00s that he is bashing
 
2011-11-29 12:38:57 AM

The Lone Talbot: Spielberg as a director in theaters, ratings from Rotten Tomatoes
100 - Jaws (1975)
98 - E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial (1982)
97 - Schindler's List (1993)
96 - Catch Me If You Can (2002)
95 - Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977)
94 - Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)
93 - Saving Private Ryan (1998)
92 - The Sugarland Express (1974)
92 - Minority Report (2002)
89 - Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989)
89 - Jurassic Park (1993)
88 - The Color Purple (1985)
86 - The Adventures of Tintin (2011)
85 - Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984)
81 - Empire of the Sun (1987)
78 - Munich (2005)
77 - Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008)
76 - Amistad (1997)
74 - War of the Worlds (2005)
73 - A.I. Artificial Intelligence (2001)
61 - Always (1989)
60 - The Terminal (2004)
52 - The Lost World - Jurassic Park (1997)
33 - 1941 (1979)
29 - Hook (1991)

Suck it, haters. He has obviously made some crap, but the great far, far, outweighs it.


I don't hate spielburg, but....

a) The old films before RT archived things, like Jaws, dont' have real scores.

b) does anyone really think Catch me if You Can is a farking amazing film? or " Minority Report"? Or most of the other ones up there?

Spielberg is a good, even great, mainstream popcorn blockbuster filmmaker. Nothing special artistically really... which is why it is weird to see him say these comments. He is the one who helped transform hollywood into this big budget, no heart or soul or innovatinon, industry.
 
2011-11-29 12:44:39 AM

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: crashdavis18: Raiders of the Lost Ark is below Catch Me if You Can? There is indeed no accounting for taste.

I didn't even notice.

Yeah, that ain't right.


That list doesn't accuont for taste. It barely even accounts for critical opinion. Sorry, but i hate RT meter. The Metacritic average score is much better. That shows actual critical opinion. In the RT thing a movie that 50 people loved but 50 people thought was kinda "meh" would get the same score as a film that 100 people thought was only okay.

Here are his best films by metacritic:

94
E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial (re-release) Mar 22, 2002 Director / Producer 7.9
93
Schindler's List Dec 15, 1993 Director / Producer 8.7
90
Raiders of the Lost Ark Jun 12, 1981 Director 8.9
90
Saving Private Ryan Jul 24, 1998 Director / Producer 8.7
86
The Adventures of Tintin Dec 21, 2011 Director / Producer tbd
80
Minority Report Jun 21, 2002 Director 7.5
79
Jaws Jun 20, 1975 Director
76
Catch Me If You Can Dec 25, 2002 Director / Producer 7.8
74
Munich Dec 23, 2005 Director / Producer


That seems much more accurate, doesn't it?
 
2011-11-29 12:56:27 AM

Leader O'Cola: Jim from Saint Paul: Can I have 2 or 3 people you consider better so I can understand where you're coming from then?


Lang
Hitchcock
Kurosawa
Clouzot
Bergman
Leone
Kubrick
Tarkovsy
Scorsese
.... to name a few


I'll Play!

Kurosawa
Bunuel
Fassbinder
Herzog
Kieszlowski
Truffaut
Eisenstein
Tarkovsky
Peckinpah
Fellini
Godard
Lean
Ford

etc.
etc.
 
2011-11-29 01:01:56 AM

beelzebubba76: Leader O'Cola: Jim from Saint Paul: Can I have 2 or 3 people you consider better so I can understand where you're coming from then?


Lang
Hitchcock
Kurosawa
Clouzot
Bergman
Leone
Kubrick
Tarkovsy
Scorsese
.... to name a few

I'll Play!

Kurosawa
Bunuel
Fassbinder
Herzog
Kieszlowski
Truffaut
Eisenstein
Tarkovsky
Peckinpah
Fellini
Godard
Lean
Ford

etc.
etc.


Judd Apatow
 
2011-11-29 01:12:41 AM
Audiences have changed the demographic is skewing younger. Jaws was seen by EVERYBODY young and old and across the socio-economic spectrum. It was largely middle aged folks who made "The Godfather", "The Way We Were" and the "Amityville Horror" successes. Now audiences are almost entirely teenagers. Teens generally don't want subtlety. They want "Harry Potter" and "Twilight" Even Speilberg is dumbing down his movies. "The Crystal Skull" and "War of the Worlds" were designed to appeal to teenagers. Entire families went to see "Jaws" and "Star Wars" that almost never happens any more.

ANY medium will start to suck when it caters to only one demographic.
 
2011-11-29 01:16:06 AM

Bill Frist: That list doesn't accuont for taste. It barely even accounts for critical opinion. Sorry, but i hate RT meter. The Metacritic average score is much better. That shows actual critical opinion. In the RT thing a movie that 50 people loved but 50 people thought was kinda "meh" would get the same score as a film that 100 people thought was only okay.


Yeah I was about to mention that, but honestly? It's not the fault of Rotten Tomatoes.

The % thing is so you can know at a glance if the movie is likable or not.

The % is just the percentage of people who liked it, nothing more.

They put an actual score in the files.

And some movies tend to be divisive, so the % will be skewed. For example: Melancholia. It's a love it or hate it affair heh.

Going by the actual Rotten Tomatoes score, we have:

Raiders with an Average Rating: 8.9/10

Catch Me with an Average Rating: 7.9/10

That's 10 points ahead.
 
2011-11-29 01:44:12 AM
"There Will Be Blood" and "The Social Network"

Watch them, Spielberg
 
2011-11-29 02:36:15 AM

mitchcumstein1: James Cameron has made some damn good movies.


His 80s flicks just lame sci-fi horror. The bad guy has to come back at the end three times, that kind of crap.

Alien was a great flick. The sequel was just dull, and didnt have much in common except for the creature and weaver.

Yeah yeah, shedloads of money, finger on the pulse, whatever. His early hits were crappy and his later ones were pablum.
 
2011-11-29 02:42:08 AM
All in all I think he's a great filmmaker, just on his body of work.

You can watch 6 random movies by Spielberg and not say "typical Spielberg" like you might if you watched Woody Allen or the abominable PT Anderson. Would you think the same guy directed Saving Private Ryan and Munich also did Jurassic Park and The Terminal?
 
2011-11-29 02:47:23 AM

Delawheredad: Audiences have changed the demographic is skewing younger. Jaws was seen by EVERYBODY young and old and across the socio-economic spectrum. It was largely middle aged folks who made "The Godfather", "The Way We Were" and the "Amityville Horror" successes. Now audiences are almost entirely teenagers. Teens generally don't want subtlety. They want "Harry Potter" and "Twilight" Even Speilberg is dumbing down his movies. "The Crystal Skull" and "War of the Worlds" were designed to appeal to teenagers. Entire families went to see "Jaws" and "Star Wars" that almost never happens any more.

ANY medium will start to suck when it caters to only one demographic.



Film execs have been saying this for 30 years and it's horseshiat.
 
2011-11-29 03:10:12 AM

moothemagiccow: All in all I think he's a great filmmaker, just on his body of work.

You can watch 6 random movies by Spielberg and not say "typical Spielberg" like you might if you watched Woody Allen or the abominable PT Anderson. Would you think the same guy directed Saving Private Ryan and Munich also did Jurassic Park and The Terminal?


You're not helping your case...

Anyway, so having a style is bad now? WTF...

I do commend Spielberg's ability to direct anything under the sun though (funny he directed the adaptation of Chrichton's biggest hit, a guy who could write about anything under the sun).

That tells you more about Spielberg's producing ability, as someone said before. He may falter here and there as a director, but the man is a superb producer. And not the lameass Joel Silver/Jerry Bruckheimer/Richard Donner kind of armchair producer.

Plus we wouldn't have a DCAnimated Universe, no BTAS, no JLU if not for him. So apart from thanking him for Indiana Jones, I'll always be endebted for propping up Warner's animation department in the late 80s/early 90s.
 
2011-11-29 04:23:20 AM

mitchcumstein1: DamnYankees: That's cool - I liked that movie a lot when I was a kid also. But its objectively not a very good movie

No, it's not a great film, but it is entertaining to the people it was made for, which is more than can be said for most recent Woody Allen movies.


If you knew someone like the 'know it all' guy from Midnight in Paris, you would've found those scenes highly entertaining. My buddy and I just about died laughing because of how perfectly it portrayed those assholes and the positions they find themselves in.
 
2011-11-29 05:12:40 AM

Delawheredad: Audiences have changed the demographic is skewing younger. Jaws was seen by EVERYBODY young and old and across the socio-economic spectrum. It was largely middle aged folks who made "The Godfather", "The Way We Were" and the "Amityville Horror" successes. Now audiences are almost entirely teenagers. Teens generally don't want subtlety. They want "Harry Potter" and "Twilight" Even Speilberg is dumbing down his movies. "The Crystal Skull" and "War of the Worlds" were designed to appeal to teenagers. Entire families went to see "Jaws" and "Star Wars" that almost never happens any more.

ANY medium will start to suck when it caters to only one demographic.



The big films of the 60s & 70s weren't aimed at a middle-age audience. They were aimed at a YOUNG audience. Just because Al Pacino & Streisand are now old doesn't mean they were always old. Lucas, Coppola, et al were young guns who revolutionized the way movies were made & their stories told.

"Amityville" was a horror movie. Those always have a specific audience, just like kid flicks.

"The Godfather" was aimed at adults. Believe it or not, there was a time when 24-year-olds were considered adults with real jobs and responsibilities and not simply older adolescents. Young adults, but adults. Middle-aged people went to musicals and Disney films.

"Jaws" and "Star Wars" were like "Ben-Hur" in that they became event movies. Until "Jaws" no one really thought of summer blockbusters; they thought of summer as a trash dump for biker & dumb beach flicks. "Star Wars" was the first true space opera since the 50s, and its success caught everyone by surprise. ("2001" was a stoner's dream film.)
 
2011-11-29 05:23:40 AM
There are tons of movies from the last twenty years that could be called classics, and stand the test of time.

Here are a few that I think will still be watched in 50 years time.

Fargo
Trainspotting
Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon
Y Tu Mama Tambien
Children of Men
The Lives of Others
The Bourne... (any of them)
Slumdog Millionaire
The Dark Knight
The Pianist
Amelie
Wall-E
Up
Elizabeth
Pulp Fiction
Something the Lord Made
Dogma
Avatar
Dave
Thirteen Days
Shawshank Redemption
Unforgiven
Four Lions

And a whole bunch more. I wonder if Spielberg whined about the quality of movies during the 70's and 80's too.
 
2011-11-29 06:00:27 AM
beelzebubba76 :

Leader O'Cola: Jim from Saint Paul: Can I have 2 or 3 people you consider better so I can understand where you're coming from then?


Lang
Hitchcock
Kurosawa
Clouzot
Bergman
Leone
Kubrick
Tarkovsy
Scorsese
.... to name a few

I'll Play!

Kurosawa
Bunuel
Fassbinder
Herzog
Kieszlowski
Truffaut
Eisenstein
Tarkovsky
Peckinpah
Fellini
Godard
Lean
Ford

etc.
etc.


Coleman Francis!
 
2011-11-29 06:23:28 AM
thisdistractedglobe.com
 
2011-11-29 08:20:44 AM
Arnold's been busy in government of Caleefornia.
 
2011-11-29 08:57:23 AM

Camus' Ghost: beelzebubba76 :

Leader O'Cola: Jim from Saint Paul: Can I have 2 or 3 people you consider better so I can understand where you're coming from then?


Lang
Hitchcock
Kurosawa
Clouzot
Bergman
Leone
Kubrick
Tarkovsy
Scorsese
.... to name a few

I'll Play!

Kurosawa
Bunuel
Fassbinder
Herzog
Kieszlowski
Truffaut
Eisenstein
Tarkovsky
Peckinpah
Fellini
Godard
Lean
Ford

etc.
etc.

Coleman Francis!


Malick
Lynch
Coen Brothers
Morris
Miyakazi
 
2011-11-29 09:38:59 AM
upload.wikimedia.org

/not sure if serious
//seriously, how in the hell did this manage to get put up (and stay) on Netflix?
 
2011-11-29 10:16:47 AM
I wonder how many of the opinions in here are educated.
 
2011-11-29 10:28:54 AM
Subby here.

I confess that I always love a good Spielberg argument and that was the reason I went with a trollish headline. That said, I'm certainly of the opinion that the man's good output far outweighs his bad output (Jaws and Raiders alone allow for at least two dozen horrible films). It's unfair to blame the success of those films (along with E.T. and Close Encounters) for what happened to the industry afterwards. He may have helped create the concept of the modern blockbuster, but it's not his fault that the studios went full-tilt retard with the idea.

But there's one thing in the article that I have to admit I thought sure someone would have latched onto as an interesting, somewhat hypocritical bit:

Attacking the prevalence of film franchises - movies based on toys, or video games, that are intended to sell a product as much as they are to entertain - Spielberg said: "I think producers are more interested in backing concepts than directors and writers."

...says the executive producer of Transformers 1-3.
 
2011-11-29 10:29:14 AM

DeathByGeekSquad: mitchcumstein1: DamnYankees: That's cool - I liked that movie a lot when I was a kid also. But its objectively not a very good movie

No, it's not a great film, but it is entertaining to the people it was made for, which is more than can be said for most recent Woody Allen movies.

If you knew someone like the 'know it all' guy from Midnight in Paris, you would've found those scenes highly entertaining. My buddy and I just about died laughing because of how perfectly it portrayed those assholes and the positions they find themselves in.


I saw the movie last friday and I was thinking about how smarmy that guy was, but ultimately he (1) managed to fark Rachel McAdams and (2) was right about nostalgic people and the Golden Age syndrome he talked about when they were at Versailles.

He was an asshole, but still managed to bone the dude's girlfriend and ultimately he was in the right :(

It's so poignant.

BTW, isn't uncanny how much Owen Wilson looks/channeled Woody in the movie? :O
It's obvious this was supposed to be him, just that he's too old to be believable now.
 
2011-11-29 10:42:19 AM
My favortie Scorsese film:

image.xyface.com
 
2011-11-29 10:52:19 AM

Mulchpuppy: But there's one thing in the article that I have to admit I thought sure someone would have latched onto as an interesting, somewhat hypocritical bit:

Attacking the prevalence of film franchises - movies based on toys, or video games, that are intended to sell a product as much as they are to entertain - Spielberg said: "I think producers are more interested in backing concepts than directors and writers."

...says the executive producer of Transformers 1-3.


It certainly comes across as hypocritical, but the comments about toys and film franchies is not part of his actual quote. Did he really attack merchandising during that interview? Or is that just the author of TFA embellishing?

Based on the quotes alone, Spielberg is coming off as your typical "they don't make 'em like they used to", which is pretty much what everybody his age is saying and what everybody his age has always said. People here are overreacting like always.
 
2011-11-29 11:50:29 AM

moothemagiccow: mitchcumstein1: James Cameron has made some damn good movies.

His 80s flicks just lame sci-fi horror. The bad guy has to come back at the end three times, that kind of crap.

Alien was a great flick. The sequel was just dull, and didnt have much in common except for the creature and weaver.

Yeah yeah, shedloads of money, finger on the pulse, whatever. His early hits were crappy and his later ones were pablum.


Wait, so now James Cameron and Steven Speilberg, both responsible for some of the most famous and iconic scenes ever put on film, are shiat?

DeathByGeekSquad: If you knew someone like the 'know it all' guy from Midnight in Paris, you would've found those scenes highly entertaining. My buddy and I just about died laughing because of how perfectly it portrayed those assholes and the positions they find themselves in.


This thread is filled with them.
 
2011-11-29 12:01:44 PM

Lando Lincoln: DamnYankees: I don;t know what to say. The movie itself is not amazing, but the craftsmanship really is. Spielberg knows how to tell stories.

Yeah, "craftsmanship." As in, "Hey, wouldn't it be AWESOME if we had a scene where the aliens attacked a ferry boat full of cars and people and the boat started tipping over and the cars were all rolling around and smashing up people and stuff? And people DROWNING in the cars! Yeah, I know it doesn't make a goddamn bit of sense to have a ferry boat full of cars that don't work. I mean, why wouldn't all the people just push the dead cars off of the ferry boat and then an extra thousand people would be able to be loaded onto the ferry boat every trip? If we were to write this sensibly, then we wouldn't have that AWESOME SCENE where the cars go flying into the water and shiat!"

"Craftsmanship." Otherwise known as "eye candy."


I won't say that War of the Worlds was a great movie but the issue of the cars does make sense if you think for a moment that the van Tom Cruise and his kids were driving around after his friend (that got vaporized after Tom stole the car) spent about 5 minutes fixing it (he put in a new battery or starter or something). Don't you think that a few other people had the same idea or maybe some cars were far away enough from the attacks that they still worked? And that having working cars would be pretty important and would be worth saving the space on the ferry? Oooooor...are you one of those people who like to point out movie goofs that only appear to be goofs because you expect every detail of a movie to be presented in a 2 hour movie and you can't think for yourself? Or as I like to refer to your kind, a Derpity Derp.
 
2011-11-29 12:13:50 PM
Obviously he's yet to see this cinematic masterpiece

www.milehighcinema.com
 
2011-11-29 12:16:18 PM

dopeydwarf: FWIW though, this is one of my favorite war movies ever:

[www.moviegoods.com image 580x824]

Take that as you will.


Agreed. Casualties of War is amazing.

/shook me up
 
2011-11-29 12:32:31 PM

gunga galunga: Based on the quotes alone, Spielberg is coming off as your typical "they don't make 'em like they used to", which is pretty much what everybody his age is saying and what everybody his age has always said. People here are overreacting like always.


And that is an excellent point you make there. But I have to believe that there must have been something that led into that snippet. It's entirely possible that the initial question wasn't as leading, though, and I probably shouldn't have played the hypocrite card so easily.

But then again, this is Fark.
 
2011-11-29 02:39:30 PM

mitchcumstein1: Wait, so now James Cameron and Steven Speilberg, both responsible for some of the most famous and iconic scenes ever put on film, are shiat?


Just Cameron.
 
2011-11-29 04:04:55 PM

DamnYankees: Lando Lincoln: There was that War of the Worlds remake that was...oh, yeah, that sucked donkey balls. Who was the director of that one again? That guy should have been fired.

That was an excellent, excellent movie with one fatal flaw (the stupid son thing). But otherwise, brilliantly made movie.


I especially love the fact that the first extermination tri-pod comes from beneath a CHURCH. Awesome!
 
2011-11-29 09:49:35 PM
dopeydwarf: There have been great movies made over the past couple decades, it's just that Spielberg hasn't made one in a while so he thinks they don't exist. Stevey, watch a good Woody Allen movie and see how it's done. I really love Match Point. Midnight in Paris was pretty damn good too and both were made within the last decade.

To be fair Spielberg hasn't really "directed" much. He's been producer / executive producer on quite a few stinkers, but then again I usually run away when something gets slapped with that.

Since 2001 he's only directed or co-directed about 9 movies, Tin-Tin and war Horse included . IMDB has him in about 35-40 productions since then.
 
2011-11-29 09:55:05 PM
Lando Lincoln: DamnYankees: I don;t know what to say. The movie itself is not amazing, but the craftsmanship really is. Spielberg knows how to tell stories.

Yeah, "craftsmanship." As in, "Hey, wouldn't it be AWESOME if we had a scene where the aliens attacked a ferry boat full of cars and people and the boat started tipping over and the cars were all rolling around and smashing up people and stuff? And people DROWNING in the cars! Yeah, I know it doesn't make a goddamn bit of sense to have a ferry boat full of cars that don't work. I mean, why wouldn't all the people just push the dead cars off of the ferry boat and then an extra thousand people would be able to be loaded onto the ferry boat every trip? If we were to write this sensibly, then we wouldn't have that AWESOME SCENE where the cars go flying into the water and shiat!"

"Craftsmanship." Otherwise known as "eye candy."


You mean like a gigantic battle station, a death star if you will, that is impenetrable but for one convenient exhaust port? I mean, you think that thing would be buried under several decks, wound around like a snake, and diffused out smaller openings with a blow back valve.

News flash, movies sometimes forgo realistic for the cinematic.
 
Displayed 186 of 186 comments



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report