Most underrated and most overrated movie by Steven Spielberg and why?
-
rascal67 — 10 years ago(August 14, 2015 06:16 PM)
War Horse and Empire of the Sun..are very poetic in their simplicity, there was a lot of heart put into these movie and love for the characters..Saving Private Ryan or Schindler's List, they might have emotional moments, but they just feel fake to me, because I can't relate to the characters, and I can't see anything real about them.
These films were made with entertaining the audience in mind and making them more easily digestible. With 'Saving Private Ryan' and 'Schindler's List', one has to be in the right frame of mind and in particular with 'Schindler's List', it is more like a film of observation and being a voyeur\witness to what is happening. It is the mirror image, of what is being reflected and looking at our own attitudes and behaviors as human beings. It was a cold, bleak, dark and disturbing era and the scary part is, still not that long ago. My parents were children during these times. SPR, while not wholly entertaining, I still find it quite compelling and if only because I am experiencing the horror and atrocity of something from a distance and the comfort of an armchair. While I am anti-war and see the insanity of it all, I can also still acknowledge how brave and courageous many of these men were, considering the extraordinary circumstances they were thrown into.
I don't really like SCHINDLER'S LIST and have viewed several times. I agree that is does have a certain fakeness about it. It can't be real life, yet the costuming looked too fresh and tailored for many of the actors and they looked too clean as well, considering what some of them were experiencing. It has a blandness and contrivance about it, like Spiellberg was being too careful and lost some essence in the telling of the story. I suppose I expected something more or different and that is not to discredit it's virtues as a technically excellent film, made with the best of intentions.
May I recommend Elem Klimov's COME AND SEE-85'. This is a Russian Film, about the Nazi occupation of Bylorussia. It is a poetic, stunning and disturbing masterpiece and I am with the young protagonist all the way. The horror and insanity of it, is not lost on him or the viewer. -
henrikvinther — 10 years ago(August 23, 2015 04:25 PM)
These films were made with entertaining the audience in mind and making them more easily digestible
That's pretty much the description of all Spielberg movies in my opinion, which is why the movies with the heavier subjects, such as Saving Private Ryan and Schindler's List fail in my opinion.
I mean in SPR, the first 20 min show what war is, totally chaotic and non-sensical, the rest tries to make sense of it. Example? You let a bad guy go, and he'll return and try to kill you. That's manipulation in my opinion. SPOILER: As is the way the opening makes it seem like the film is Tom Hanks' character's flashback, when in reality it isn't even a flashback (Ryan isn't present at Omaha Beach), which is revealed to us in the end, when it's shown that the old man in the beginning is Matt Damon's character, and the guy, who we thought was having a flashback, died. SPOILER END
I haven't rewatched SPR in quite some time now, so maybe I will change opinion with a rewatch. But some of the weaknesses really stand strong for me in my memory, so I doubt I would change opinion.
Come and See is a masterpiece, one of the greatest WWII/holocaust movies. I couldn't say it better than you do.1908
that'll be the day -
alejandrodeleon559 — 10 years ago(September 03, 2015 11:09 AM)
I think the problem with these people is emotion. How do I say this. I feel like these are the people who see a film like A Clockwork Orange and say well that's a good film. True emotion, true storytelling. And then expect all other films to be the same way.
I mean how could you call a film like SPR melodramatic? It's insane. Or say that SL is cheap storytelling, because it just goes after the viewers emotions. Well that's what Spielberg is good at. Provoking emotion, I think he more than anyone understand the human spirit. And that's what you need to make a good film. Not always of course. But I prefer those, I think only those can be the best. I mean enjoy There Will Be Blood as much as the next film enthusiast. But close to death when it mattered I'd rather watch a Spielberg film and not Paul Thomas Anderson. And preferably one of Spielbergs classics.
Nolan is another director who understands the human spirit.
Anyway, humans are intended to enjoy these films. One's that aren't corrupted by some traumatic event, and still very much feel. I think in a war film, it's when there isn't a battle scene that you get close to experiencing what war felt like. About the inbetween, the small conversations, and the exchanges between soldiers. Walking across hills, and lonely landscapes, and the mortar shells blasting off in the distance. WAR.
My point is these guys don't like Spielbergs style. And it's because they don't understand the human spirit, or lack it. We aren't all created equally. Some of us are psychos. -
RevengeOfToonces3 — 10 years ago(June 12, 2015 09:16 PM)
Overrated - Minority Report. Good movie, but not THAT good.
Underrated - ET. It's almost like people have forgotten about this movie. I watched it again recently and it's still damn great.
"He makes me laugh, he'a always humping and pointing at Reese Witherspoon."- rebschucks
-
Robbmonster — 10 years ago(June 25, 2015 09:53 AM)
I won't go into too much detail
Underrated - Munich. Great blend of thriller, politics, and morals, filmed with the usual impeccable virtuosity and flair. An interesting thing about Munich is the reaction to it, with so many accusing Spielberg of being either anti-Israel, or pro-Israel. If the 'side' the director has taken is so abundantly unclear, he has done something very right.
Overrated - Saving Private Ryan. My least favourite word in film criticism is 'manipulative'. It's used by people who felt moved by a film they didn't want to be moved by. Saving Private Ryan IS a manipulative movie, if for no better reason than the audience is made to think the man in the prologue is John Miller (Tom Hanks) thinking back to his own experiences, when really it is James Ryan (Matt Damon) 'remembering' events he wasn't even present to witness, basically rendering 2/3 of the story moot. Speaking of story. There really isn't any, just a series of incidents and encounters. Having said all that, it is still thoroughly watchable any old day of the week.
By the way, totally agree about A.I. A far more complex film than it is given credit for, and possibly the most misunderstood in Spielberg's oeuvre.
Never defend crap with 'It's just a movie'
http://www.youtube.com/user/BigGreenProds -
rascal67 — 10 years ago(August 07, 2015 04:02 AM)
My least favourite word in film criticism is 'manipulative'. It's used by people who felt moved by a film they didn't want to be moved by.
Well put. However, the manipulation you refer to about SPR and thinking that the old man at the beginning is Hank's character does appear contrary, to the statement you made above. I thought the same myself; but I think this is more of a
sneaky
deception that Spielberg played on the audience, rather than a manipulation and that only boils down to the importance and skill of using visuals to tell a story. This is where Spielberg excels. The fate of Hank's character moved you, when you didn't want to be moved and these are your own words. Accept the offering, of what Spielberg gave us here. Life, as in the war depicted, has a capricious nature and you can't always know what is around the corner. -
Robbmonster — 10 years ago(August 08, 2015 03:18 AM)
I don't disagree with you at all, however I don't see the conceit of SPR as an emotional manipulation nearly as much as it is a storytelling one. The word you used was perfect; it was 'sneaky'. Spielberg made it very clear through visual storytelling that Miller was remembering his own experiences. It turned out that this was simply a lie. Nothing to do with 'my own interpretation', it was just a trick.
And it's not as though SPR is a film that is reliant upon such a trick in order to make some kind of 'twist' work, it was done simply to make the audience believe it was Captain Miller remembering his own past, as opposed to Pvt Ryan remembering battles he could not possibly have any memory of because he simply wasn't there to witness them.
From a technical standpoint, this sneaky trick doesn't exist for reasons of added emotional impact, it exists in order to have the epilogue and prologue AND the Omaha111c Beach battle.
I was moved by Miller's death, but at the same time I felt stooged and cheated, because there was a clear visual queue that it was Miller remembering his own story, not Ryan remembering Miller's story.
Never defend crap with 'It's just a movie'
http://www.youtube.com/user/BigGreenProds -
rascal67 — 10 years ago(August 09, 2015 05:21 PM)
Spielberg made it very clear through visual storytelling that Miller was remembering his own experiences. It turned out that this was simply a lie. Nothing to do with 'my own interpretation', it was just a trick.
Spielberg made it 'clear', so as to bring the tale full circle by the end. The film segues from the close-up of the old man's face, onto shots of an empty Omaha Beach; it is not edited so as to appear as a direct recollection from him. It is telling the tale indirectly. If the shot melded straight onto Miller's face, then it would have been an 'absolute' deceit. One of Ryan's brothers was involved in the conflict at Omaha, yet we didn't know this until the sequence was over and closed on a pan of his dead body, that enables us to see the name on his backpack. That is the first connection to the Ryan of movie's title and sets up the chain of events that follows.
Remember, the film is called 'Saving Private Ryan' and while the surviving Ryan doesn't appear until about 2\3 into the film, it is still 'all' about Ryan and those that set out to 'save' him. The beginning of the film, was the start of the end and by the conclusion, we saw the reason for him being at Miller's headstone. Only then, did we understand who this person was and why he felt the guilt and confusion that he did. He could have just as easily died like the rest of them, yet he survived and Miller's last words, were that he had 'earned' it. That was something that weighed on Ryan the rest of his life, as the man who set out to save him, wasn't able to save himself. Ryan had a purpose to survive, as he 'knew' was going home after the fact. If anything, I think Spielberg should be exonerated for us thinking he 'tricked' the audience, due to his masterful direction and story telling. If it wasn't Tom Hanks in the lead, would it have felt 16d0different? -
Robbmonster — 10 years ago(August 09, 2015 10:56 PM)
Well said. I always 'remember' the film as having a straight cut from the aged Ryan to Hanks on the boat, even though - as you correctly point out - this is not the case. So, if anything, Spielberg merely 'plants the seeds' for an audience to think it's the same character, and if I fell for it, that's my own problem.
Incidentally, what are your thoughts on the original topic at hand? I noticed you haven't made a direct post on the subject, and I would be interested in your thoughts.
Never defend crap with 'It's just a movie'
http://www.youtube.com/user/BigGreenProds -
rascal67 — 10 years ago(August 10, 2015 04:21 AM)
Incidentally, what are your thoughts on the original topic at hand?
MOST UNDERRATED:
1941-
79'. I realize this is probably a minority opinion; but I loved it when I first saw it at the cinema in 1980, I was 12 and talked my older sister into seeing it, when I went the second time. Have also throughly enjoyed, on subsequent viewings.
I can understand audiences not liking it, due to some of the broad, zany and slapsticky comedy; but the whole presentation has epic written all over it and visually, I find it astonishingjust as much as CLOSE ENCOUNTERS-77'. Spielberg took an important and historical time in US history, that was cause for severe paranoia and turned it around full swing, on it's head. It becam16d0e something riotous, loud, noisy, crazy, stupid, absurd and full of pandemoniumwasn't WWII like this also?and he also brushed it, with his usual warm pang of nostalgia for an era too.
Also
underrated:
MUNICH-
05'. Have only viewed once and it knocked me for a six. Afraid if I see it again, I may not feel the same way, so have held off. The most controversial film of 05', even over BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN and CRASH and the academy had to take the easy way out, by awarding CRASH best picture, which had a trite and worn presentation, of it's racism themes. MUNICH, was so well honed and balanced with it's story and own prejudice themes, that I think it's main point about vengeance and revenge, taking most of it's toll on those desperate to inflict it and a government that is willing to engage in criminal terrorist acts themselves, blurred some lines for many viewers and it challenged their own perspective and fixed stance.
MOST OVERRATED:
JURASSIC PARK-
93'. While there are some good and exciting sequences, I find it all plays out pretty routine and there is kind of flatness to it, that I can't quite put my finger on. The Denis character was a caricature and as soon as he appeared, I started to think
wtf
, is this supposed to be a stupid comedy, or a suspenseful creature feature, ala Jaws. It was a bit of a mish mash and I think it was only made to showcase what they had achieved with CGI. Spielberg, was probably too preoccupied with SCHINDLER'S LIST-93' at the timea film that I find quite bland as welland didn't have his whole heart and soul invested in the presentation. Not a fan of Sam Neil at the best of times, or Jeff Goldblum for that matter. Laura Dern, is a good\fine actress and she deserved better material. -
makaroney — 10 years ago(July 08, 2015 09:19 AM)
OVERRATED:
Schindler's List(3/10), Saving Private Ryan(4/10) - manipulative hollywood movies
Raiders of the Lost Arc(6/10) - nice silly adventure and that's it.
Color of Purple(3/10) - might be his worst film. Sappy hollywood melodrama.
UNDERRATED: Munich(9/10) - for me it's his best and most mature film, A.I(8/10), Duel(7/10)(pure cinema). I used to like Empire of the Sun.
MY GUILTY PLEASURE: Hook:) -
rascal67 — 10 years ago(August 07, 2015 03:38 AM)
Saving Private Ryan (one of the most over patriotic, flag-waving and morally simplistic war films I've ever seen)
I think you missed the point of the film. Just because the film opens and closes on an image of the American flag, you think that this makes it flag waving? More than anything and like poster
TheLoneStranger
has commented, I really don't feel there is all that much patriot to be read into this. The irony here, is the horror and atrocities that Ryan was recollecting and embroiled in, has nothing to do with how he is feeling as an American; but as a human being and a soldier who was sent off to fight for a cause, that really only became a game of personal survival and keeping his hide intact. Same for all the others. This was also something that involved the whole world, not just Americans and was total pandemonium; something that Spielberg proved to us, in his loud, rambunctious and awesome
1941
-79'.
Any emotional confusion and guilt, that Ryan felt over his involvement and actions, overshadowed anything that could be perceived as courageous and brave, that he was doing for his country. The same goes for all nationalities involved in t5b4he combat. Ryan, didn't even have to be involved in the final battle, as he had a choice to go home. He didn't and this would have only compounded his grief and sorrow, over his experience. The paradox here, is that if he did choose to go home, he may have still felt the same way, for deserting his buddies. There is NO out, when it comes down to conflict, violence and suffering. -
toursiveu — 10 years ago(August 09, 2015 05:38 PM)
MOST UNDERRATED
: "
Always
"
Because it's such a nice little, humble feel-good film. The tone, between pure comedy and melodrama is reminiscent of those great films from the Golden Age of Hollywood. Richard Dreyfuss is irresistible. John Goodman too. Holly Hunter is adorable. The photography is sublime I just don't understand how anyone with a beating heart could not love this film.
Honorable mentions : Munich, Catch Me if You Can, 1941, The Terminal, The Adventures of Tintin
MOST OVERRATED
: "
Lincoln
"
Well acted. Well written. Well cast Boring! I've tried to see it for a third time but there's no denying that it's a very boring film.
Honorable mentions : The Color Purple, Amistad -
rascal67 — 10 years ago(August 09, 2015 06:41 PM)
MOST UNDERRATED : "Always"
Because it's such a nice little, humble feel-good film. The tone, between pure comedy and melodrama is reminiscent of those great films from the Golden Age of Hollywood.
I think that is what Spielberg was trying to capture. Yes, the cinematography is superb, however, I just don't warm or connect to this sentimental, manipulative, heterosexual relationship mush. It was also, sort of phoney. I think that is part of the reason, why it failed. Does it even have much of a following, or gets mentioned as being a forgotten gem? I find it incredibly un-involving and yes, boring; way more than LINCOLN, could ever be. Watching for the first time, I thought I was going to be 'always' watching and couldn't wait for it to finish. Along with HOOK-91' and WAR OF THE WORLDS-05', they are my least favorite Spielberg films. I don't even rate SCHINDLER'S LIST, that highly. Need to see THE TERMINAL and TIN TIN, before I pass judgement on them; but they don't appear to hold much appeal for me.
-
McJerginz — 10 years ago(August 12, 2015 07:04 PM)
MOST UNDERRATED: The Adventures of Tintin
I Feel like most people forgot about this film and why it was so great. For one thing, the animation in this is fantastic. Also, Andy Serkis is great in it as the captain. It is a fun, light-hearted adventure film that is probably the best adventure film since Raiders of the Lost Ark.
Honorable Mentions: War of the Worlds, Duel, Catch me if you can, Empire of the Sun.
MOST OVERRATED: Lincoln
I can't believe that this was nominated TWELVE academy awards. It's a boring, Almost 3 hour movie, about Abraham Lincoln talking to people. THAT IS IT! I can't believe I waited for this in theaters, hoping it would be good.
Honorable Mentions: Close Encounters of the Third kind and Minority Report
Guilty Pleasure: Hook
The only thing separates me from a homeless man is this job. -
alejandrodeleon559 — 10 years ago(September 03, 2015 11:00 AM)
I won't insult you. I'll give you a chance. Watch the film again. It's a classic, and quite frankly one of the best films ever made. Every scene is exactly right, and there is so much meaning behind even the simplest scene. It's subtle and often times you'd miss it if you weren't paying attention. Schindler definitely transforms, as people do. I think it's a realistic transformation.
He has no overrated work.
-Jaws
-Schindler's List
-E.T.
Underrated would be
-War Horse
-Munich
I think Lincoln was appreciated by most people.
Watch Schindlers List again. Maybe you've grown a little more. To here it described as overrated is surprising. I would question the person that declared that. How little do they know about film? -
catmydogs — 10 years ago(September 03, 2015 03:32 PM)
UNDERRATED: I, for one, LOVE A.I. I think it is a beautiful and haunting film, albeit rather depressing by the end. It is one of the few films I've seen twice in movie theater. It is certainly a far more intelligent sci-fi film than most of the disappointments being released in theaters now.
OVERRATED: I happen to like Saving Private Ryan a lot. But, only during the action sequences. When the soldiers start talking, the film starts to drag and become rather stupid. Compare to The Thin Red Line, by Terrence Malick, also released around the same time; TRL was a far superior film and a true work of art and poetry, not just a commercial venture.