comment #1

Ray says ...

LOL C'mon, Jeff ... don't be so crabby. The YouTube clips serve to reinforce the breathtaking weight of Spielberg's career, while pondering the question - Can his career ever be topped? The end of the article serves up some leading contenders from the current crop.

Surely even you can see Spielberg's accomplishments, but I hoped that someone like you might have another director in mind that could dethrone him.

Instead, you just get bitchy LOL. I understand the snobbery, but sometimes it gets in the way of true assessment.

comment #2

Edward says ...

I wouldn't call him the greatest. How can you call anyone the greatest this or that? He's made a couple of great films, several very good films and some not so good films. Just because someone's films made $100's of millions of dollars doesn't mean they're the greatest.

comment #3

Ray says ...

@ Edward - I personally consider him the greatest because, to me, he straddles the line between art and commerce. His style is as distinct as any director ever, his films have (for the most part) been well crafted yet heartfelt, and they have redefined moviemaking several times over.

I just don't understand statements like this: "He's made a couple of great films, several very good films, and some not so good films."

What are the great ones? What are the several very good ones?

To me, he has more than a couple of great films. I consider JAWS, E.T., RAIDERS, SCHINDLER'S LIST to be great films, with MINORITY REPORT, SAVING PRIVATE RYAN, MUNICH, and CLOSE ENCOUNTERS to be right in there as well. Several others are very, very good movies as well. His flops would be 1941, HOOK, and ALWAYS ... and perhaps THE TERMINAL.

But the question asks about more than just craft or box office receipts. Spielberg has crafted a LEGACY and INFLUENCE that is monumental ... can it be topped?

If that means I'm sucking Spielberg's cock, then I'm going balls-deep on the guy.

comment #4

lazarus says ...

Is another Spielberg retrospective or love letter really necessary? Who gives a shit? He ain't The Beatles because they ushered in an era of sophistication unheard of before in popular music. Spielberg, if anything, heralded an era of dumbing down, even if he managed to mature (in some ways) out of that umbrella.

How about an article on someone that we don't already have rammed down our throats all the time. "Well-crafted yet heartfelt"? "Redefined moviemaking several times over"? You gotta be kidding me. " His career's already been topped, by more than a few names. John Ford, for one, who dabbled in just as many genres. And why does he get credit for "straddling the line between art and commerce"? He's got like, one toe over the "art" line. So I'm supposed to be more impressed by him than Bergman, Antonioni, Welles, Renoir? No, sir.

I don't know why Wells bothered to link to this. What, so we can all have at it?

This is going to be the biggest waste of comment space here for the whole week.

comment #5

corey3rd says ...

Spielberg is like Mitch Miller. he's like that Painter of Light. He's Billy Mays. He's Irving Berlin.

Beatles? Has Spielberg really directed Norwegian Wood?

comment #6

Edward says ...

The one thing Spielberg lacks as a director is subtlety. He understands the craft and some of his imagery is breathtaking, but then has to hit you over the head with a shot or a moment or his over use of music. Shindler's List is great, Empire of the Sun - to me - is his masterwork. Munich is near great. Jaws is very good, Raiders is good fun. Private Ryan had a brilliant opening on Omaha Beach and then devolved into blandness; he added nothing new to the genre. Minority Report was very good until it's conventional conclusion. AI was a mess; good mixed with blah. Close Encounters is up near the top. While I loved much of Hook, there's a lot to hate; the Lost Boys set, Julia Roberts.

comment #7

MAGGA says ...

"He ain't The Beatles because they ushered in an era of sophistication unheard of before in popular music."

Which they did when pop music was all of eight years old and no one had even used overdubs or spent any real time on an LP before. I love the Beatles, but their innovations in sound are no different than the special FX innovations of Spielbergs films. And the perception of The Beatles as lyrically sophisticated has always seemed strange to me. Inventive? Yes. Memorable. Definitely. Unique? Absolutely. Just like the films of Steven Spielberg. In terms of success he is the only one who compares to them, and he has helped change the business (not into a blockbuster-based business, as this was happening anyway - The Excorcist was already out, Star Wars was already planned, and the shift of commercial strategy happened in all forms of entertainment)

comment #8

Terry McCarty says ...

Re MAGGA's post:
The shift really began in 1972 when THE POSEIDON ADVENTURE became a Christmas holiday smash.

comment #9

JHRussell says ...

"The one thing Spielberg lacks as a director is subtlety."

Edward nailed it. I also think that "Empire of the Sun" is Spielberg's best, but I am not a big fan of much else he has done exceept perhaps "Jaws." AI is god awful, and "Minority Report" was disappointing.

comment #10

DavidF says ...

These Spielberg things go and on and on. The Beatles are a good comparison because they bridged pop and "art." Like Spielberg, they had a profound influence that cool people tend to shrug off, with an "I never really GOT the big deal with The Beatles."

Both have also inspired a zillion lesser knock-offs.

I agree Empire of the Sun is very underrated and, along with AI, I think it's the most underrated thing he's done.

Edward's declaration that Saving Private Ryan "added nothing to the genre" is probably the most riddiculous comment here. If nothing else it radically altered the way war movies are shot and how combat is depicted. Visually and otherwise.

Yes, the middle is relatively conventional but I know I'm not alone in saying that the end battle is at least as good as the opening sequence because now you know the people getting shot at. Omaha Beach rightly gets all the hype but I've never bought the argument that SPR is 20 minutes of awesome and not much else.

comment #11

T. S. Idiot says ...

If Spielberg is the Beatles, Scorsese is the Stones, the Coens the Kinks, P. T. Anderson the Animals, and Wes Anderson the Dave Clark Five.