Jump to content

SPIELBERG, Upcoming HBO documentary


Disco Stu

Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, Nick1066 said:

That's not the point. Everyone know's Spielberg isn't short of cash. But he says it wouldn't have been a challenge, and would have been a slam dunk.  Yes, that's a pretty douchey way to describe himself, especially since what he said isn't a given. 

 

I think you may be misinterpreting his words. It's more that it provides no artistic challenge for him, personally. He's not interested in cashing in on already existing cash cows this way. HARRY POTTER was already a phenomenon before the first movie was ever announced. He's adapted popular books before, of course, but not like this. So I can perfectly well understand his sentiment. It's better to pick the projects that appeal and challenge you on a personal level.

 

There's absolutely nothing "douchey" about this. It's just common sense. He's not saying "I would have made this absolutely brilliant", he's saying "there is nothing here that triggers me, and I'm not interested in adapting something that is set to be a success because of the book's popularity".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe you will find it is you who are mistaken Thor. About a great many things. Your interpretation of what Spielberg said is pretty rose coloured. And there was no guarantee that just because the books were popular that they'd work as films (and they wouldn't have if Spielberg had his way). It was far from inevitable at the time. And yes, he said making the movie would have been a "slam dunk" for him and wouldn't present a challenge....and would have made a billion dollars. There's no other reasonable way to interpret that other than he thinks making the film, and making it a huge success, would have been easy.  Which is absolutely bullshit given his terrible ideas on how to adapt it.  There's no way an animated film, especially what he had in mind, would have made the billion that Columbus's film ended up making.  I actually think he went on to make TinTin (barely broke even...franchise dead) and BFG (lost money) because he regretted dropping the ball on Harry Potter.

 

And I'm still waiting for you to show me where someone here said Spielberg hasn't made a good film in 20 years. Or that he's "too old."

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Makes me wonder what the next Harry Potter will be? A new cultural phenomenon with such mass appeal, its cultural influence and significance transcends it's own medium and becomes embedded into the public consciousness. Harry Potter achieved that, Star Wars is still running with it. The Hunger Games maybe, but that was never quite as huge as HP, and its teen dystopian copycats have died a quick death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Baby Jane Hudson said:

Makes me wonder what the next Harry Potter will be? A new cultural phenomenon with such mass appeal, its cultural influence and significance transcends it's own medium and becomes embedded into the public consciousness. Harry Potter achieved that, Star Wars is still running with it. The Hunger Games maybe, but that was never quite as huge as HP, and its teen dystopian copycats have died a quick death.

 

Well, with Stranger Things and "It" being huge wild successes, Stephen King/Speilbergian 80s nostalgia is having a moment.  Ready Player One will fit into that slot too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Disco Stu said:

 

Well, with Stranger Things and "It" being huge wild successes, Stephen King/Speilbergian 80s nostalgia is having a moment.  Ready Player One will fit into that slot too.

 

Ehh those will come and go. And they're more just cash-ins on nostalgia, which has been a thing for the last decade.

 

No, SW and HP are institutions. We might not see another one of those for a while.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Game of Thrones is close for the moment, but as much as I love that series, and the books, I'm not convinced it will have the same staying power as HP or SW. It's a pop culture phenomenon, to be sure, but such things can be fickle and I think among the general public the GOT mania will fade once the series ends.

 

SW and HP are here to say though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Nick1066 said:

Game of Thrones is close for the moment, but as much as I love that series, and the books, I'm not convinced it will have the same staying power as HP or SW. It's a pop culture phenomenon, to be sure, but such things can be fickle and I think among the general public the GOT mania will fade once the series ends.

 

SW and HP are here to say though.

 

Yeah, the key differentiating factor is that GoT is aimed at adults and SW/HP at children.  Things people fell in love with as children tend to become the institutions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Baby Jane Hudson said:

Could it be Marvel? Is that the "institution" I'm thinking of?

 

They're certainly planning on keeping the MCU alive for decades to come.  Time will tell if audiences allow it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nick1066 said:

I believe you will find it is you who are mistaken Thor. About a great many things. Your interpretation of what Spielberg said is pretty rose coloured.

 

Nobody is "mistaken" here. We're just interpreting the statement differently. I don't agree with your interpretation. I think it's more a reflection of his own view on projects that trigger him than any kind of arrogant statement that success was guaranteed, because he's the best director who ever lived. That's a too cynical way to look it. Again, I urge you to watch the documentary, where he goes into some of this.

 

Quote

And I'm still waiting for you to show me where someone here said Spielberg hasn't made a good film in 20 years. Or that he's "too old."

 

Don't be ridiculous. Nobody said that. It was my way of expressing the type of "mood" I often see in these discussions. It was fairly obvious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I seem to recall seeing an interview a few years ago in which Spielberg indeed talked about passing up on Harry Potter, because it was "shooting ducks in a barrel". He was simply being matter of fact about it. He was being light-hearted and he was quite animated in how he conveyed it, as he can be. He didn't come off as arrogant in the slightest, the man wasn't "showing off".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I just put the quote above. Here it is again:

 

Quote

"I purposely didn't do the Harry Potter movie because for me, that was shooting ducks in a barrel. It's just a slam dunk. It's just like withdrawing a billion dollars and putting it into your personal bank accounts. There's no challenge."

 

This is just wrong, because he's suggesting that doing HP would have been easy for him, and it would have been wildly successful. And I'm saying his other attempts along these lines (i.e. TinTin and especially BFG) demonstrated that going back to such familiar territory isn't as natural, or easy, for Spielberg as he suggested it would be.

 

And yeah, saying there's "no challenge" in adapting a book like Harry Potter is frankly sort of an arrogant thing to say. Especially given at the time he had no idea how to do it properly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's one of the worst Spielberg quotes, for sure. They've been getting worse over the years.

 

"Temple of Doom sucks, I just like that I met my wife when I made it."
"Roy should have never gotten on the spaceship."
"I made Crystal Skull for George. The fridge was my idea."
"Harry Potter would not have been challenging."

 

Shut up, ya idiot!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking back at that movie the only scene I can say I really liked is when Indy was at home talking about losing his father & Marcus. It was the only honest moment in the whole film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Nick1066 said:

Honestly, looking back at that movie the only scene I can say I really liked is when Indy was at home talking about losing his father & Marcus. It was the only honest moment in the whole film.

I know many disagree with me, but if the movie took that approach as a whole--the idea of an Indy who's _actually_ aged--I think it would have been a lot more entertaining and interesting. I'm holding out hope that the next one will actually do something with this. 

 

When it came out, a lot of people commented that Tintin is what Crystal Skull should have been, but what made Tintin successful in my eyes was that Spielberg was able to be himself, in the sense that it was a movie with its own sensibilities, one that Spielberg felt comfortable with. Kingdom of the Crystal Skull fails in a lot ways because it's only a sketch trace of the originals, without the true heart that drove them. It was trying to be something it wasn't, in other words.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Nick1066 said:

Looking back at that movie the only scene I can say I really liked is when Indy was at home talking about losing his father & Marcus. It was the only honest moment in the whole film.

 

I loved the fake all-American town on the test site.  All that stuff was great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed. As I said in another thread, I think the film is REALLY good up untill they get to Peru. And yes, that includes Shia Labouef, who is fine in this film. Never understood the issue people had with him either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Disco Stu said:

The fridge was one of the best parts of KOTCS!  It's when Shia shows up the and introduces the main plot that the movie goes to shit.

 

Eh, I think the motorcycle chase is a fair piece of action directing and at least the early Indy/Mutt stuff attempted to build some sort of rapport. Also the early Peru stuff, while not really exciting or suspenseful in any way, was at least mildly diverting and tried for a bit of atmosphere. It at least still felt like it was maybe heading somewhere.

 

The jungle is the real tipping point for me. The quicksand scene in particular is when I think everything becomes badly farcical and never looks back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, mrbellamy said:

 

Eh, I think the motorcycle chase is a fair piece of action directing and at least the early Indy/Mutt stuff attempted to build some sort of rapport. Also the early Peru stuff, while not really exciting or suspenseful in any way, was at least mildly diverting and tried for a bit of atmosphere. It at least still felt like it was maybe heading somewhere.

 

The jungle is the real tipping point for me. The quicksand scene in particular is when I think everything becomes badly farcical and never looks back.

 

Oh!  I actually forgot about the motorcycle chase!  Yeah I liked that.  Thor is correct, Peru is when it starts going downhill and yeah the jungle is the official "jumping the shark" moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Disco Stu said:

The jungle is the real tipping point for me. The quicksand scene in particular is when I think everything becomes badly farcical and never looks back.

As much as I agree, I've always had a strange soft spot for Indy's mini lecture on quicksand. Something about the way Ford delivered those lines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crystal Skull was OK right up to the point where they got to Peru. Not great, but not the truly awful mess the film would become.

 

But really, I don't think we need another movie about an old Indiana Jones anymore than we need one about a young Han Solo.  I think there is the possibility of a good film in there, but not if they continue to use the first three movies as a template. Ford is just too old in the role to be a believable action hero. He could pull it off in TFA and 2049 b/c he didn't have to carry those movies...Indy of course is a different thing.

 

But maybe if they really embrace Indy's age, and make that part of the story (ala Rocky Balboa), they might be able to put together something decent. Spielberg said once that when he made Crystal Skull he deliberately tried to take himself back to the director he was when he made the Indy movies.  Which is an awful thing to do when you think about it. He's not that person anymore, or that director. He was just imitating himself. It's like an ageing rock band covering their own songs. And I think that was part of the problem...the same problem he had with BFG. There is no going back. He should make an Indy movie with the sensibilities he has now. Don't make an imitation of a 1982 Spielberg movie. Leave that to JJ Abrams. Make the best Indy movie 2018 Stephen Spielberg can make. Then there's a chance it could be something authentic. And if he can't get passionate about it, then he shouldn't do it. Just like he should have nixed Crystal Skull when he knew Lucas was fucking it up.

 

Of course, not having Lucas involved at all helps too.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those have turned out pretty good. They brought those characters back as re-imagined 21st Century versions. Ford as an old man is just silly and a young guy playing a younger version of a Ford character is stupid. Bruce Wayne and Norman Bates existed in print before they were adapted to film and such. Han Solo only ever really existed as a character played by Harrison Ford. So it's not like this young guy is playing the character, he's playing Ford. Does that make sense? I want chips.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I would love to see a fifth Indiana Jones that was more in the style of the YOUNG INDY series. That is, less about the action stunts, and more about character relations. Would probably disappoint a lot of people expecting the "Indiana Jones formula", but it would be a much better film. There were elements of this in the first half of KOTCS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Nick1066 said:

Yeah, I just put the quote above. Here it is again:

 

 

This is just wrong, because he's suggesting that doing HP would have been easy for him, and it would have been wildly successful. And I'm saying his other attempts along these lines (i.e. TinTin and especially BFG) demonstrated that going back to such familiar territory isn't as natural, or easy, for Spielberg as he suggested it would be.

 

And yeah, saying there's "no challenge" in adapting a book like Harry Potter is frankly sort of an arrogant thing to say. Especially given at the time he had no idea how to do it properly.

 

I've got be honest, but I don't really care how you have construed the words from the guys mouth as you have read them, because it's perfectly normal and extremely common to misinterpret someone's meaning or their honest intentions from text. Anyone with an instant messenger app or indeed a forum account knows this. All I know is I saw the guy saying it on a video somewhere one time and I did not pick up on any sense of arrogance you're determined to attach to it. It was rather playfully communicated to the interviewer actually. Certainly assured in himself, but it wasn't this big boast you're talking about. To my eyes, he was having a laugh. I'm not particularly interested in what's involved in getting a Harry Potter movie made; I'm only talking about seeing a guy talking and listening to what he said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, either way, thank God we didn't get the crappy Steven Spielberg version of Harry Potter.

 

Anyway, it all worked out in the end. Columbus made that billion dollars for everyone and kicked off a wildly successful film series, while with TinTin Spielberg finally realised his dream of adapting a beloved children's novel by animating it and butchering elements from multiple books.  Too bad that franchise is dead. Easy as shooting ducks in a barrel.

 

At least he redeemed himself with the billion-making BFG (obviously not a challenge for a director of Spielberg's calibre). He's still got the magic!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't even finished the Harry Potter saga of movies, I don't know how it all ends. Contrary to trendy internet opinion, BFG ain't a bad movie by any stretch; it's just strangely very boring. It's sparkless. But it competently made as always, and there are highlights in the runtime that just about make it worthwhile. A very pedestrian adventure, obviously made by a pensioner. I bet very older people quite enjoy actually.

 

War of the Worlds remains the Spielberg movie I hate most.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apart from raking in obscene amounts of cash i don't see Potter movies having any relevance to anything (except for readers of the book, for which they present a welcome prolonging of a pleasant experience). I think Spielberg is often held on too high a pedestal here, resulting in endless over-analyzation of often quite simple things and what if-rhetorics that suddenly make pleasant sunday afternoon movies like the BFG into huge discussions - i guess Spielberg himself would be more than content with making his one or two movies a year without people bothering all that much about the nuts and bolts.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.