Steven Spielberg

This is the place to talk about films from around the world.

Re: Steven Spielberg

Postby Ria » Mon Sep 29, 2003 5:50 pm

Minority Report, again like with so many others of his films, he just doesn't know when to stop. He just have to go on and explain in excruciating detail what happened and give it a totally sugary ending.

[b]*SPOILER ALERT*[/b]
I think it should have ended with the shooting. No matter how he tried, his fault or not, he couldn't prevent what was happening. That would have been full circle - that would have been perfect.

I felt the same about A.I, he just took it too far. If it only ended with the Blue Lady.
Ria
 


Re: Steven Spielberg

Postby felipejuanfroilan » Mon Sep 29, 2003 11:28 pm

IDEA: SPIELBERG HAS A GREAT TECHNIQUE MAKING FILMS, AND SOME OF THE STORIES HE DEVELOPS ARE GOOD, BUT HE DOESN'T LET LIFE ENTER HIS FILMS.

EXAMPLE: ELLIOT AND E.T. CYCLING IN FRONT OF THE MOON

EXPLANATION: This is the most famous moment of the film, but I don't feel any spetial emotion, because I can't feel the emotion of Elliot.
Elliot is alone with ET, nothing is more important than him, so: why does Spielberg choose a general image, showing the sightseeing, instead of focusing on the face of the obviously elated Elliot?
Moreover, the widened moon. OK, It is a traditional and efficient idea to create a special environment. But for Elliot it's the same, because he isn't looking at the moon!
I already know that the moon is beautiful, what I want to see is the emotion of Elliot staring at the moon, bigger than ever.




felipejuanfroilan
 

Re: Steven Spielberg

Postby Gaz » Tue Sep 30, 2003 9:36 am

Maybe Spielberg is prolonging the Elliot facial close-up until the end, when the tension is brought to a head. The problem I have with E.T is that it seems too cold, calculating and frankly manipulative. It's possible to achieve poignancy without recourse to Spielberg's particular brand of deviousness, his clear objective of making the viewer cry.

Watch, for example, Whistle Down the Wind, and compare the two. I know which film is more moving for me.
Gaz
 

Re: Steven Spielberg

Postby Knoxville » Wed Oct 01, 2003 6:19 pm

I understand that Mr. Speilberg is very popular with the masses. I've seen a few of his films and been entertained by them, but they are far too family friendly for me to love them.
Knoxville
 

Re: Steven Spielberg

Postby Gaz » Wed Oct 01, 2003 9:03 pm

Most of the posts I leave on this site seem to be nothing more than statements of agreement with others, but here goes again... I know exactly what you mean and could not agree more.
Gaz
 

Re: Steven Spielberg

Postby HenryGinsberg » Sat Oct 11, 2003 3:42 pm

I have a question for all those who say that Spielberg's films have no depth, or say that they are just popcorn films - has it ever occured to you that maybe you just don't understant Spielberg's work? That maybe there was something deeper in all those films that you just missed? Oh wait, these are Hollywood film, so there couldn't possibly be anything of depth there. I am really angry with all the f*cking anti-Spielbergism that is plaguing the film society. Every film he makes, you all immeadiatly search for ways to critasize it. With just about any highly rated film ever made, I can imagine the ridiculous critasisms that people would throw at it had it been directed by Spielberg. If you viewed his films with an open mind (that would mean making you're critasisms of his films AFTER you've seen them), and actually bothered to analyse them rather than dismis them at the earliest opotunity, you'd realise that Jurassic Park is about a lot more than dinosaures. Please stop taking the view of "it's Hollywood and it makes a lot of money so it MUST be crap".

...and I suppose that like all the rest of the media snobs who like to think of themselves as intellectuals, you've already asumed that the reason I rate Spielberg is that I'm a stupid teenager who thinks that cinema began with The Terminator and is unawear of any films pre-James Cameron. Well I'l have you know that I am a teenager, and my other favourite directors are Kurosawa, Kubrick, Eisenstein, S.Ray, Fellini, Sorsese and Truffaut, so go f8ck yourselves.
HenryGinsberg
 

Re: Steven Spielberg

Postby jasjesbe » Sat Oct 11, 2003 5:39 pm

When you grow older, you'll learn that you don't have to insult to make your point clear.

Take it easy. It's just a chat.
jasjesbe
 

Re: Steven Spielberg

Postby HenryGinsberg » Sat Oct 11, 2003 6:03 pm

Please don't patronise me. Don't talk to me like I'm some stupid kid who doesn't know what he's talking about. I have a very high IQ (not that I really belive that you'r intellegence can ever be determined through a test), and I recognise that I don't need to insult to make a point. Hawever I have a deep simering hatred of anti-Spielbergians, because among other things, their ignorance has often provoked me to hurt myself. I have some serious mental problems, and am often effected by comparitively small things.

BTW, I'm sick of you people thinking you're better than me just because I'm younger than you. If you tried living my life for a while, you wouldn't last 2 weeks, so don't talk down to me as if you're a world-weary man of wisdom.
HenryGinsberg
 

Re: Steven Spielberg

Postby Gaz » Sat Oct 11, 2003 8:07 pm

btw it's 'criticism' not 'critasism' - hence the word 'critic'.
Gaz
 

Re: Steven Spielberg

Postby Gaz » Sat Oct 11, 2003 8:20 pm

Sorry, I'm an arsehole, I know.
Gaz
 

PreviousNext

Return to Film Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 3 guests

cron