Spielberg: Best Years Behind Him?

[bruce_pullen]

Steven Spielberg, best years behind him? It's been years... since his last classic. Is Steven over the hill? Yes or No?

[browinie]

No. I'm surprised someone would even ask.

[Lucy Diamond]

We won't really know until he dies.

He might have his best years---3 years from now.

Until he buys it, you really can't look back and pick a period until all the periods have been resolved.

[bferr1]

Originally Posted by Lucy Diamond

We won't really know until he dies.

He might have his best years---3 years from now.

Until he buys it, you really can't look back and pick a period until all the periods have been resolved.

Sorry, that's ridiculous. That's like saying you can't compare a band's first album to their 12th because their plane hasn't crashed yet or they haven't yet recorded their masterpiece 14th album.

[bruce_pullen]

Originally Posted by bferr1

Sorry, that's ridiculous. That's like saying you can't compare a band's first album to their 12th because their plane hasn't crashed yet or they haven't yet recorded their masterpiece 14th album.

Agreed.

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by bferr1

Sorry, that's ridiculous. That's like saying you can't compare a band's first album to their 12th because their plane hasn't crashed yet or they haven't yet recorded their masterpiece 14th album.

very true. Could he be tired? I mean we all have these moments where we can't find the energy to keep going, happen's to everyone. Maybe he's just tired? His imagination just not what it was?

I was thinking that reading your example because we see that in many bands as the years roll by, you can feel that they just seem to be going through the motions but the joy is just not there.

[bruce_pullen]

Originally Posted by Lucy Diamond

We won't really know until he dies.

He might have his best years---3 years from now.

Until he buys it, you really can't look back and pick a period until all the periods have been resolved.

Interesting point.

But until... he has that great period.. you speak of..

The trend is pretty apparent... He’s operating on a lesser level.

Like Orson Welles said, "They'll love me when I'm dead."

Death is the final arbiter. But don't redeem, what you see. Because of what isn't... yet..

That's all I'll say.

[kpkelley]

Indiana Jones was certainly a dissapointment, but not from a Directorial point of view. Furthermore, I really enjoyed Munich which more than made up for his misstep with War of the Worlds.

I vote NO.

[Gremal]

I thought Munich was the wrong movie with the wrong message...at a very wrong time. He is a brilliant director but he has lost his way. I hope he finds it soon.

[mikejet]

He'll be making an awesome movie soon to make back all that money Madoff took.

[ckent22]

Not at all. Spielberg is arguably the greatest director who has ever lived and he definitely is the most successful director alive. You can't blame certain films he did on a bad script. A great director can take a bad script and make it translate well to the screen which is what he did with Indiana Jones 4.

[bruce_pullen]

Originally Posted by ckent22

Not at all. Spielberg is arguably the greatest director who has ever lived and he definitely is the most successful director alive. You can't blame certain films he did on a bad script. A great director can take a bad script and make it translate well to the screen which is what he did with Indiana Jones 4.

The question is… Is there a trend of negative growth? The days of Raiders, Jaws, or Private Ryan... are getting farther all the time. Is Spielberg now... worthy of his reputation? Does the Director of War of the Worlds, Munich, and Crystal Skull feel like the man who did Temple of Doom, Close Encounters, or Schindler's List?

That's the question?

His past should be a measures, not an excuse. Those classics should keep him aggressive. Not coast on prior hits.

Remove the legend folks… Ask if what he’s doing measure up… to what was.

The past shouldn’t be a life preserver. Present merit not past glory..

That’s the question.

Is Spielberg still Spielberg?

[ckent22]

Originally Posted by bruce_pullen

The question is… Is there a trend of negative growth? The days of Raiders, Jaws, or Private Ryan... are getting farther all the time. Is Spielberg now... worthy of his reputation? Does the Director of War of the Worlds, Munich, and Crystal Skull feel like the man who did Temple of Doom, Close Encounters, or Schindler's List?

That's the question?

His past should be a measures, not an excuse. Those classics should keep him aggressive. Not coast on prior hits.

Remove the legend folks… Ask if what he’s doing measure up… to what was.

The past shouldn’t be a life preserver. Present merit not past glory..

That’s the question.

Is Spielberg still Spielberg?

Simple answer yes.

[mustang-gt-2002]

sorry but yes I think he is. dont think he will ever have movies like before. last one for me was jurassic park.
after that it was down hill

[JamesKurtovich]

Eh, not really. But I do think his movies were more well received in the 90's (E.T., Jurassic Park, etc.). His latest movies aren't too great. Especially War of the Worlds. And I hate how he ended Kubrick's A.I..

[bferr1]

With the exception of "Schindler's List" and "Saving Private Ryan," I generally prefer Spielberg the Wunderkind to Spielberg the Sophisticated Artiste.

[bruce_pullen]

Originally Posted by bferr1

With the exception of "Schindler's List" and "Saving Private Ryan," I generally prefer Spielberg the Wunderkind to Spielberg the Artiste.

The best thing I've read all day.

Agreed.. (with the exception of those two, I would also add Minority Report) I vastly prefer the Wunderkind to the Artiste.

Tarantino once said... he hopes to retire: before he made the leap from sensation to Auteur.

In the end, it is the Wunderkind. We remember fondly. Not painful posturing... Or half-baked replicas of what was..

[richieb1971]

Spielberg had a choice to do War of the worlds and Crystall Skull. If he didn't like the script he shouldn't have made the movies.

If Spielberg resorts to aliens in his movies, I think he is running out of ideas. If you look at his resume, almost 50% of his movies have an alien theme in them.

If you look at raiders, then you look at skull, if I didn't know I would say they were from different directors. One has creativity, breaks new ground, has tons of stunts, awesome cast that provides intrigue and wonder into his creation. The other just mimics some run of the mill action with an alien twist at the end that never seems to gain pace or excitement.

So I vote yes, he is over the hill. But I think he is more than capable of a surprise. Thats why I will still watch his movies.

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by bferr1

With the exception of "Schindler's List" and "Saving Private Ryan," I generally prefer Spielberg the Wunderkind to Spielberg the Sophisticated Artiste.

Yes I am with you on this but maybe he wanted something different, try something different? Maybe he wanted to make different type of movies to change him from the popcorn fun summer movies of his youth? He is now in his 60's, you see the world differently then when you are 30 something.

[reallyagi]

If you had a great script or idea, would you doubt that Spielberg could translate into a great film? I wouldn't. He's still THE MAN!!!