This is correct, though I should add that Hooper was right beside Spielberg as Spielberg cranked out the final shooting script of the film. Hooper probably had a lot of say in what went into the film and how it was structured.
You can find photos of him almost looking like a director on the set of
The Goonies and
Gremlins as well. It's just there wasn't a concerted effort by the studio's marketing department to push photos showing Spielberg doing nothing more than be an involved producer (which is all that a photo can really do).
I'd argue it was the other way around, if the sheer number of divergences and seemingly spontaneous additions/eliminations from the script suggest a constant subverter of Spielberg's "big picture vision." It's negligent to suggest the "E.T. Contract" theory has any validity when the film was Hooper's initial concept and had shook hand with Spielberg to direct it before Spielberg even conceived of "E.T." with Melissa Matheson.
Yes. The film has a much more objective, restrained approach to images - ones that focus on architecture and the oppressive nature of enclosed spaces - and also a clear sense of artificiality that is much more in line with Hooper's work than Spielberg's.
Hooper birthed the entire idea to make
Poltergeist and went on to co-develop or sign-off on its direction, before he and Spielberg essentially co-concocted the final shooting script (with help from Frank Marshall and Kathleen Kennedy). He was not just "hired"... he was an integral part of the film's conception, and it's a weird phenomenon for people to ignore that even though it's been included in the history by everyone's go-to source of verified facts, Wikipedia. Spielberg was trying to produce more entering the 80s, and so: "When Spielberg approached Hooper to direct [alien invasion film "Night Skies"], Hooper was less keen on the sci-fi elements and suggested the idea of a ghost story. Spielberg and Hooper would then go on to collaborate on the first treatment for the film."
Nah.
Spielberg doesn't think in terms of architecture and oppressiveness. There's also a stillness and soft-focus haziness (as opposed to the more overt things in Spielberg films, like Marion foregrounded by the candle flame - instead, we can never really tell what backgrounds characters in Hooper's films) in
Poltergeist that bypasses any of Spielberg's constant kinetics. That is all Hooper did up to that point.
[Show spoiler]
[Show spoiler]
For more:
https://twitter.com/poltrgthts_imag/
John Leonetti's entire argument boils down to: 1) The film was heavily storyboarded (but does he know how often the storyboards were completely thrown out? Hooper often stated his lack of interest in using storyboards, despite the necessity of them in a film of this budget); 2) Spielberg would invite them to his house to show dailies (sounds like a producer); 3) "Sometimes Spielberg would leave the set and let Hooper do his own thing just because." So Spielberg directed it, but
he was the one who would leave the set? 4) "Steven developed the film, it was his to direct." That's objectively wrong and indicates a person who is not in control of the knowledge he purports to have. The film was always agreed to be Hooper's as it was his pitch. Once the script was written, Spielberg was always the hanger-on to Hooper's concerted effort (every account of the film's pre-production - yes, including that one anonymous Spielberg supporter - state Hooper was the main person in charge during pre-production. Their relationship on the set is the only thing that has caused ay confusion, and it's a fuzzy area that no one really has any right to come to conclusions about except Hooper and Spielberg themselves. Hooper maintains the film definitely feels like his style, pushed to a different territory by his collaborator Spielberg, as all his films tend to change between their varying inspirations).
The pool scene reminds me of Texas Chain Saw's dinner scene, and JoBeth Williams slipping back in the pool (not in the storyboards) very much like Marilyn Burns jumping through windows twice. And what Spielberg did doesn't say anything about directing, nor does Williams's remarks ever say anything about Spielberg staying in there the entire time. The pictures we have of the shooting of that scene show Hooper presiding over the set and numerous puppeteers surrounding Williams - in the pool - as they needed to control the corpses, Spielberg nowhere to be found. That said, that scene took days to shoot, so we have no idea really what happened through the course of those days. Sounds like Spielberg did it as little more than a demonstration.
Again, everything being said is little more than speculation. Outside of every outspoken and non-biased actor stating Hooper directed them almost exclusively, here's an on-the-record story of Beatrice Straight putting her foot down at Spielberg's overbearing presence (the same sort of behavior he is said to have had on sets like
Used Cars and
The Goonies) and stating who exactly she was going to listen to:
Here is the other actor's statements:
[Show spoiler]
And a picture:
[Show spoiler]
Finally, about
Invaders from Mars, check out the first act of the film Canon Pictures cut out in this rough cut of the film, as they weren't interested in a "character development director":
'Invaders From Mars' Rough Cut - YouTube. It may clear up some misconceptions that Hooper always got to do exactly what he wanted to do, and that what he wanted to do automatically isn't
Poltergeist.
All countries
Argentina
Austria
Belgium
Brazil
Bulgaria
Chile
China
Colombia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Estonia
Denmark
Finland
Greece
Hong Kong
Hungary
Iceland
Indonesia
Ireland
Israel
India
Latvia
Lithuania
Malaysia
New Zealand
Norway
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Singapore
South Africa
South Korea
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan
Thailand
Turkey
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
Linear Mode
