Steven Spielberg's Greatest Film

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

'Hook' preferred over 'Jaws'?

Give. Me. Strength.

But Jaws was already a novel in its own right.

Hook reinvents Pan.

 

[Simster]

'Hook' preferred over 'Jaws'?

Give. Me. Strength.

I agree. However THE PEOPLE HAVE VOTED.

 

[Danny-Boy]

Surprised "Raiders" hasn't got more support. It generated the whole IJ series, and certain scenes have been pastiched in other places, especially the rolling ball sequence in "The Simpsons"...

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

Don't stress about it. Simply consider any votes void for films you don't like, and declare your own favourite the 'winner'.

I think we all get the message now mate and I have apologised so why not let it rest.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Empire of the Sun.

Excellent film.

Not only an excellent film, but having also read the book and being a bit of a J.G. Ballard fan, it really is one of the best book adaptions I have seen for the big screen.

 

[Danny-Boy]

Raiders of the Lost Ark for me, but it was a coin toss with Hook. My daughter loves Hook and, as such, it's probably the Spielberg film I've seen the most. However, before this poll - I didn't actually know it was a Spielberg work!

There are some quite serious tones to the film - most notably that of the relationship of children with parents in the modern age where work/life balance is often out of kilter - but it's just good old fashioned fantasy escapism played with aplomb by a stellar cast. Hoffman, particularly, is brilliant. And the score, contains a number of magical pieces that I still listen to on a near-weekly basis - great pick-me-up stuff.

As I say, I went for the first Indy film but if my daughter had been with me when I voted, it would have been Hook all the way and I can easily understand how any parent could make such a vote.

Nice you support me on "Raiders" though Bozza. I thought that "Hook" was one film where Robin Williams flopped. Would love a "Best of RW" vote.

 

[Joey Deacon's Disco Suit]

I think we all get the message now mate and I have apologised so why not let it rest.

but no reply yet from you regarding the questions I asked.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

but no reply yet from you regarding the questions I asked.

Please repeat the question.

 

[The Large One]

....

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Fair enough HT, just seems a strange choice from all the films he did , to say , it was his greatest, but if thats what people think , its what they think. My other poll I am doing has Hook at 19th.

It's a very clever film. A reworking of a classic story and the kids love it. But if you start to scratch away at the surface it reveals all manner of themes and reference points possibly revealing something about Speilbergs very own life and thoughts. You know a lot more about him than me, what's your take on Hook?

 

[Steve Foster]

see below

 

[Steve Foster]

Schindlers List

The most moving film I have ever seen. And all of course based on true events.

The scene at the end always cracks me up, when the actors are placing stones on the graves, hand in hand with the descendants of the holocaust survivors. Truly heart wrenching & moving.

 

[MattBackHome]

For what it's worth (not a great deal) I think Hook is nigh on unwatchable I dislike it so much.

 

[Joey Deacon's Disco Suit]

Please repeat the question.

You'll find them all below:

No mate. We haven't had a laugh. Well, I'm certainly not smiling at being told my views don't count because it doesn't fit with your views.

I asked some genuine questions there. What part of the production studio in all those flashy big budget CGI films did Spielberg play in it? Why is a good old-fashioned kiddie's film deemed worthy of inclusion yet his most complex and also most difficult film to make ignored? Do you really believe Raiders of the Lost Ark wasn't a children's film?

Schindler's List - have you ever taken a step back from that film and considered that you are being spoon fed what emotions to feel throughout the entire film. Take that red coat for instance. Was that necessary as part of the film? We know that girl was being led to her death, we can see the clothes piled high in huge bundles. It does not need to be signposted that the two events are linked. And the use of a little girl rather than a fit man was also deliberately used to play even more with our emotions.

And Raiders of the Lost Ark - have you considered the claims of racism in those films?* Esp the portrayal of non-Americans/Europeans.

Have you even the slightest idea about Spielberg?


*by racism, I mean stereotyping and the way the characters are either cowardly, prone to mob-mentality or have oh-so-funny ways

For all those voting for Schindler's List, I ask - are you voting because of the filmcraft or because of the subject matter and the way it made you feel? If it was the latter then I suggest you read Primo Levi's books about the Holocaust. He deliberately chose not to play for people's emotions because he wanted people to feel the real almost casual horror of how it was normalised by both aggressors and victims. Anyone director can make a sad film esp about genocide. It takes a really clever person to make you take a step back and consider how and why people acted the way they did. Spielberg went for the easy option, in my opinion.

 

[Joey Deacon's Disco Suit]

Schindlers List

The most moving film I have ever seen. And all of course based on true events.

The scene at the end always cracks me up, when the actors are placing stones on the graves, hand in hand with the descendants of the holocaust survivors. Truly heart wrenching & moving.

You have illustrated perfectly what I think the problem with that film is.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Schindlers List

The most moving film I have ever seen. And all of course based on true events.

The scene at the end always cracks me up, when the actors are placing stones on the graves, hand in hand with the descendants of the holocaust survivors. Truly heart wrenching & moving.

I'm not sure if this was the turn of phrase you were searching for, there?

Maybe it was?

 

[DTES]

[Rant]Ugh - Minority Report. Yes, all films based on books change the original story, but this completely turned it on it's head and inverted the entire meaning/point/moral behind it. Absolutely turned what was a fantastic story completely upside-down, and I hate it for it.[/Rant]

That aside, I'm a fan of quite a lot of Spielberg films. I was a lad of 11 when Jurassic Park came out, and will always have fond memories. Jaws and Close Encounters were both before I was born but are films I still love. Must admit I've never seen Schinder's List, so should probably sort that out very soon. Also a bit of a soft spot for The Terminal - lovely film though I didn't know it was one of his!

Anyway, in short - my vote goes for Close Encounters (particularly as the poll title is for his best work, rather than just my favourite)

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

You'll find them all below:

Spielberg uses the latest technology and has created new technology through his films. He does not over rely on CGI in his Films. In War Horse there is pretty much no cgi at all. The battle scenes are all enacted with real people ( as was Saving Private Ryan ) and real horses. The lighting is all real , not computer enhanced, the red sunset at the end is real, not created in a studio as many people have falsely stated. I don't think Raiders was a kids film at all, no. Schindler's List was more about some good coming out of the horror of it all. He went as far as he could. He could have been more graphic and considered doing a documented scene when Nazi officers threw babies at out windows for the Nazi's on the ground to use as shooting practice on the way down . He thought about it but did not include it. Likewise the shower scene he alluded to the gassing but did not include it. Did he manipulate people ?, I don't think so, the subject matter did that and most people think he got the balance right.

Racism ?, not so much in Raiders but Temple of Doom accusation were made and Spielberg is reported as agreeing he used some stereotyping in that film which he would not do now.

Do I know anything about Spielberg ? I think so.

 

[Stumpy Tim]

Hook is the most underrated film I've seen. It's seen as a stupid kids film by many, but there's much more thought into it than other Spielberg films. Schindlers List could be a great film, but is ruined (for me) by that awful scene where Neeson is crying saying stuff like, "I could have save a life with this watch blah blah blah" - Americans might need their emotions force fed, but I don't. Saving Private Ryan is utterly ruined by all the soldiers having perfect white teeth in a war zone. I'm pretty sure Colgate wasn't in their kit bags. Jaws is good, but it's essentially a fish eating people.

Hook is a family fest, and unashamedly so. Maybe it's because Christmas is just over, but for me it represents the childhood fun that Christmas is all about

 

[Joey Deacon's Disco Suit]

Spielberg uses the latest technology and has created new technology through his films. He does not over rely on CGI in his Films. In War Horse there is pretty much no cgi at all. The battle scenes are all enacted with real people ( as was Saving Private Ryan ) and real horses. The lighting is all real , not computer enhanced, the red sunset at the end is real, not created in a studio as many people have falsely stated. I don't think Raiders was a kids film at all, no. Schindler's List was more about some good coming out of the horror of it all. He went as far as he could. He could have been more graphic and considered doing a documented scene when Nazi officers threw babies at out windows for the Nazi's on the ground to use as shooting practice on the way down . He thought about it but did not include it. Likewise the shower scene he alluded to the gassing but did not include it. Did he manipulate people ?, I don't think so, the subject matter did that and most people think he got the balance right.

Racism ?, not so much in Raiders but Temple of Doom accusation were made and Spielberg is reported as agreeing he used some stereotyping in that film which he would not do now.

Do I know anything about Spielberg ? I think so.

He uses real lighting? Woop-de-do. So he uses the latest technology but how much of that is him and how much is it due to the creative geniuses in the production room?

Your point about CGI is not really valid either. He uses CGI as and when it is needed. Obviously for a historical film about WWI it's needed less than for a science fiction film.

And you have spectacularly missed my point re Schindlers List. In fact you are so far off the mark I'd ask you to re-read what I wrote. My point is (and I'll try to make it very clear) is that Spielberg went for the easy emotional angle with the film. Some of the characters (Ralph Fiennes, the Rabbi) are so 2-dimensional that it is hard to believe them. A much more difficult thing would be to look at how people normalised their situations in the ghetto and how ordinary people from both sides accepted the situation. Why were the jews so subservient even when they knew there was certain death? How did it come to be that other non-Jews (Schindler excepted) did not question what was happening. Basically - what made Schindler (who was until then a bit of a Delboy character wheeling and dealing with limited success) so very different? It's a massive question at the very heart of the film and it got nowhere near the attention it should have got.