At what point did Spielberg movies start being overproduced and how do we feel about this?

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

Maybe not the right term. I was reminded watching the Lincoln trailer. Everything feels so...artificial? The hairstyles, costumes, sets, etc. Nothing has a genuine lived-in feel to my eyes. It may be intentional, but it looks like an expensive movie.

That said, Jaws, Close Encounters, Raiders, and E.T. do not feel this way.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Spielberg is a romanticist. He likes things looking larger than life.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

His earlier movies are generally not like that.

[Andy 4,127]

Great topic. The answer lies somewhere between Temple of Doom and Last Crusade.

[Jay 37,364]

I think it happened when he returned to film making after taking 4 years off post-Schindler. Actually, no, The Lost World isn't like that.

I think it happened after Saving Private Ryan

[Matt C 454]

I think it happened after Saving Private Ryan

I agree with that. War of the Worlds was the only exception IMO.

[Jay 37,364]

Oh WOTW is just as "overproduced" as everything else he's done recently I think. Though the special effects are better.... grittier, less glossy

[Matt C 454]

I don't know, the sets on WOTW looked lived-in to me. *shrugs*

[publicist 4,643]

Spielberg sometimes ventures in the area of 'worthy' movies, as in AMISTAD, SPR, LINCOLN or even WAR HORSE (a clunker it may be, but in the warped world of Hollywood, even such crude stories are considered OSCAR^TM bait). Which means all his best instincts get castrated to serve a national worthiness he seems to crave - invitations to the George Washiington bedroom included.

I found TINTIN much more alive in this respect, but agree WOTW looks rather spontaneous, too. MUNICH ain't bad, either, but gets bogged down by its european sightseeing feel ('see, there's the Eiffel tower in the background, it's Paris!').

[Quintus 5,399]

Janusz Kaminski.

[publicist 4,643]

He makes them blue but not overproduced.

[Quintus 5,399]

The question was at what point did it begin, and for me Kaminski's style is far too glossy and pristine, clinically perfect and totally lacking in character. Unnatural, overproduced.

[publicist 4,643]

THE COLOR PURPLE, EMPIRE OF THE SUN and even JURASSIC PARK are the epitomes of 'glossy'.

[Quintus 5,399]

I think all three of those look and feel great.

Actually, I'd be interested to see TCP in high resolution.

[publicist 4,643]

It isn't out on Bluray?

I like the them, too (except JP, which just feels as plastic as the movie) but there isn't anything subtle or modest in their styles.

[A24 4,333]

But the look of Schindler's List is great and often feels very authentic (the film clearly copies original photo and film material).

[Quintus 5,399]

It isn't out on Bluray?

I like the them, too (except JP, which just feels as plastic as the movie) but there isn't anything subtle or modest in their styles.

I know what you're saying, but back then Spielberg's style was broadly cinematic yet deeply personal. Larger than life yet naturalistic and down to earth. Today Spielberg's movies are by and large the visual mirror image of Williams' accompanying music - highly sophisticated technical exercises devoid of attack and audacity.

The old chums have grown far too comfortable together. At this stage in Spielberg's career I believe a new composer could be a positive influence. And bin Kaminski.

[publicist 4,643]

Wait a minute, stating that on a Williams board means intense shock treatment until you see things from the right side again...

Williams acts as Spielberg's gangway to Oscar respectability since a long time and as recent discussions over SAVING PRIVATE RYAN have shown, people love to fall into the respectability trap. On the other hand, Williams joins in on the fun for lighter stuff like TERMINAL and the grittier-than-expected WOTW, so it's partly unfair to cite him as responsible for the arch gloss his music often pours over Spielberg films - it's very much demanded by SS, so there's a certain longing for the days when intense filmmakers like Oliver Stone let Williams loose doing unusual stuff like BOTF.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

At what point did Spielberg movies start being overproduced?

When you started growing up.

[gkgyver 1,645]

That may actually be a good answer.

[Jay 37,364]

No, Spielberg of the 00s and 10s has a clear different style than Spielberg of the 70s 80s 90s

[MSM 126]

I think it has do with the fact that too many people are involved in the production process. From the script to the storyboards etc there are too many compromises. Everything has been fleshed out before the shooting has even started. It's the same story with George Lucas. There is hardly room for spontaniety any more, the way they make movies.

[Incanus 5,714]

And still Spielberg has storyboarded everything since the time of the Raiders I think, a movie he was hell bent to make and deliver on time after the fiasco of 1941. I think his effient shooting style began after that. But of course there are storyboards and then there are films that look like they were transferred directly from storyboards.

[Jay 37,364]

I think it has do with the fact that too many people are involved in the production process. From the script to the storyboards etc there are too many compromises. Everything has been fleshed out before the shooting has even started. It's the same story with George Lucas. There is hardly room for spontaniety any more, the way they make movies.

YES, this is the crux of the problem. Somewhere post-AI Artificial Intelligence it seems like all his films are meticulously planned before a frame is shot, and then its just a sequence of by the numbers events to get the film shot, edited, scored and released. I see less and less "Spielberg-isms", its more like he is letting the individual collaborators shine more. Though I think Tintin was an exception, that was very Spielberg-esque.

[publicist 4,643]

Add to that the bitter disappointments MUNICH and A. I., both movies where he stretched the comfort zone and both were badly received - in case of MUNICH for different reasons than in A. I. which just would have needed a better writer, but both of these failures resulted woundlicking and more safe films (the good MR would have been even more sanitized but it was practically in production when A. I. opened).

[BLUMENKOHL 1,068]

I think it has do with the fact that too many people are involved in the production process. From the script to the storyboards etc there are too many compromises. Everything has been fleshed out before the shooting has even started. It's the same story with George Lucas. There is hardly room for spontaniety any more, the way they make movies.

YES, this is the crux of the problem. Somewhere post-AI Artificial Intelligence it seems like all his films are meticulously planned before a frame is shot, and then its just a sequence of by the numbers events to get the film shot, edited, scored and released. I see less and less "Spielberg-isms", its more like he is letting the individual collaborators shine more. Though I think Tintin was an exception, that was very Spielberg-esque.

I came here hoping to say something like this, and it was already said. Great thanks.

But yeah, basically the romantic innocence of the earlier films was just that...romantic innocence. In the later films you feel manipulated.

[Muad'Dib 1,802]

It's the budget.

Think of what Spielberg wanted to do originally with Jaws, before the shark started to malfunction. If he'd had the budget for better special effects, he would have showed the shark as much as he wanted to in the original storyboards. But because of those limitations, it turned out for the best.

Now Spielberg hasn't got any limitations. He can do whatever the hell he wants, and people don't like that.

But I'm not into that group of people, actually. I practically love all kinds of Spielberg, from his early Duel days to War Horse. I don't think there's a film of his that I have seen that I haven't liked... People don't tend to understand that War Horse, for example, is a homage to John Ford and David Lean, and they get pissed at it for its overuse of being "sentimental" (whatever the hell that means nowadays).

Spielberg, first of all, if a film-buff. He loves and breathes films. After that, he's a business man. But first of all he is an absolute lover of all kinds of films, and he comes from the generation of "masturbating" directors, meaning that they want to homage the films of their youth in their actual and current works. Just like George Lucas and Sergio Leone, for example.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

I agree with many points.

I'm feeling like things were changing around Last Crusade, where things start to look and feel so staged. I don't even feel Temple of Doom had this problem so much. Look at the Cairo scenes in Raiders, which look like they literally just set up cameras in the city and started filming Harrison Ford.

Kingdom of the Crystal Skull always looks like it's on movie sets with bad extras and millions spent making everything look pretty. Yet, there is no soul. Once Kaminski photographs it, it looks completely horrible.

[publicist 4,643]

But I'm not into that group of people, actually. I practically love all kinds of Spielberg, from his early Duel days to War Horse. I don't think there's a film of his that I have seen that I haven't liked... People don't tend to understand that War Horse, for example, is a homage to John Ford and David Lean, and they get pissed at it for its overuse of being "sentimental" (whatever the hell that means nowadays).

Please enlighten us which 'sentimental' films by David Lean or John Ford WAR HORSE is referencing...oh wait, you can't - because all Spielberg does is aping certain camera angles and staged shots from old movies. Ford has his sentimental streaks (THE QUIET MAN) but to compare them to mushy crap like WAR HORSE (which i liked in a rainy sunday afternoon-movie kind of way) just isn't right.

If anything, WH apes old glossy MGM movies and even those usually had better scripts.

[TownerFan 4,983]

There's too much speculation and guess-work here, imho. Of course, it's all matter of personal opinions, but I find always amusing how many people seems "to know better" when it comes to Spielberg.

However, back on topic, I think a real turning point is obviously Schindler's List. A lot changed after that movie. Spielberg gambled almost his entire career and reputation with this film. It's also a very personal movie, tied very much with his own family history and his own sense of belonging to his Jewish roots. For him, it was more than just a movie. He poured blood, sweat and tears into it. I guess something clicked or changed after that experience.

[TheHouseholdCat 4]

Great topic. The answer lies somewhere between Temple of Doom and Last Crusade.

There's too much speculation and guess-work here, imho. Of course, it's all matter of personal opinions, but I find always amusing how many people seems "to know better" when it comes to Spielberg.

However, back on topic, I think a real turning point is obviously Schindler's List. A lot changed after that movie. Spielberg gambled almost his entire career and reputation with this film. It's also a very personal movie, tied very much with his own family history and his own sense of belonging to his Jewish roots. For him, it was more than just a movie. He poured blood, sweat and tears into it. I guess something clicked or changed after that experience.

Yeah, that sounds like a good explanation.

[Once 605]

[media=]

At around 4:38 John Rhys-Davies actually talks about how Spielberg changed from Raiders to Last Crusade.

[Matt C 454]

Once Kaminski photographs it, it looks completely horrible.

Spielberg should go back to Dean Cundey. Cundey has done some amazing work with both Spielberg and John Carpenter... and after they ditched him, he's been slumming it.

Kaminski's work on Spielberg's films just have two kinds of textures: gritty and hyper-realistic glossy. He doesn't adapt his style to fit the story on display anymore.

[Incanus 5,714]

Despite professing to try to replicate the style of the cinematography of the previous Indy movies in KotCS Kaminski's work still had a certain clinical and glossy look to it. But that perhaps was the entire glossy feel of the film with nary a gritty fight or surroundings in sight.

Rhys-Davies is kind of right in the above interview saying that Spielberg knew the genre and story and most of all the formula of producing an action adventure so well by the time of the Last Crusade, he didn't have to and didn't want to explore, experiment or try something challening or had to figure things out. That often challenges artist to give more than your average for a film. This is not to say that shooting your average film is a run of the mill mundane task with its myriad details and problems and challenges of course. But the challenges often spark the most creative solutions and end up improving the film.

[Hlao-roo 389]

When did glossy become such a four-letter word?

[Incanus 5,714]

Yesterday I think. At 11:45 pm to be precise.

Or it could just be you suffering from some form of dyslexia?

[Hlao-roo 389]

It would seem that in film, gritty is clearly privileged over glossy, and yet we would never tell a woman to apply lip "grit" instead of lip gloss.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

I would love to see a film depicting glossy grittiness

[Hlao-roo 389]

A gritty film about the lip gloss industry.

[Incanus 5,714]

Grit and gloss cancel each other out! It is known!

Scissors cuts paper

Paper covers rock

Rock crushes lizard

Lizard poisons Spock

Spock smashes scissors

Scissors decapitates lizard

Lizard eats paper

Paper disproves Spock

Spock vaporizes rock

Rock crushes scissors

Grit jams scissors

Gloss cancels grit

[Hlao-roo 389]

Ah, the great chain of being. Incanus has spoken. Kaminski and Spielberg need to hang out with lizards more often. It might do wonders for their craft.

[Once 605]

There is hardly room for spontaniety any more, the way they make movies.

Actually that's one of the things Rhys-Davies talks about in the interview!

[Hlao-roo 389]

Spielberg and film don't go out on dates anymore. He tells her, "I love you," but it's more dutiful sentiment than an expression of passionate devotion. Their lovemaking is all muscle memory, cold and impersonal. A once raging inferno of a romance has been reduced to cool cinder.

Is it time for a divorce?

[Quintus 5,399]

Maybe you should speak to your wife about it. Don't let festering unfulfillment turn into lifelong resentment.

[Hlao-roo 389]

What does fuel Spielberg these days? Oddly enough, sometimes resentment, as you call it, does provide the impetus to excel. Michael Jordan, arguably the greatest basketball player of all time, consistently drew inspiration from supposed doubters, perceived sleights. His pettiness (on full display in his infamous Hall of Fame acceptance speech), ironically, made his greatness possible. (In fact, he chose to walk away from the game the first time in 1993 because he believed he had nothing left to prove to others.) Maybe it's different for athletics than it is for art, even commercial art, but one wonders if, after making Schindler's List and garnering all the accolades he did from it, the boy wonder finally felt accepted by his peers and lost a certain edge.

Maybe, like Jordan, he should have retired to play major league baseball.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

I got E.T. on right now. Man, nothing can touch any of this as far as Spielberg goes, or Williams for that matter. Maybe Jaws, Raiders or Temple of Doom, but Jesus. The part where the agents search the house is unreal. Everything is perfect. I've never been as emotionally drawn into the drama of a film, felt a part of these characters' lives.

[mrbellamy 6,287]

I know what you're saying, but back then Spielberg's style was broadly cinematic yet deeply personal. Larger than life yet naturalistic and down to earth. Today Spielberg's movies are by and large the visual mirror image of Williams' accompanying music - highly sophisticated technical exercises devoid of attack and audacity.

More or less agree with this, although I think it's more a case of the screenplays not being particularly strong. He hasn't had a REALLY great one to work from since arguably Schindler's List, but for my part, I consider A.I., Minority Report, Catch Me If You Can, and Munich to all be rather audacious movies, "broadly cinematic yet deeply personal."

[JoeinAR 1,949]

I reject the premise of this thread. I don't think the idea is accurate. I think the simple fact is he's making films he want's to make not necessarily blockbuster style films.

[Hlao-roo 389]

I know what you're saying, but back then Spielberg's style was broadly cinematic yet deeply personal. Larger than life yet naturalistic and down to earth. Today Spielberg's movies are by and large the visual mirror image of Williams' accompanying music - highly sophisticated technical exercises devoid of attack and audacity.

More or less agree with this, although I think it's more a case of the screenplays not being particularly strong. He hasn't had a REALLY great one to work from since arguably Schindler's List, but for my part, I consider A.I., Minority Report, Catch Me If You Can, and Munich to all be rather audacious movies, "broadly cinematic yet deeply personal."

Perhaps Kushner delivered this time. He certainly seems to think so.

I reject the premise of this thread. I don't think the idea is accurate. I think the simple fact is he's making films he want's to make not necessarily blockbuster style films.

Well, as long as they're not glossy. God forbid they be that.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

I have been on of Kaminski's biggest detractors but he has done some great work for S.S., and not so great work. Yet I think War Horse is a beautifully shot film.

Steven has often gotten great results from his various DP's.