By reading the subject, I thought this was going to be about how Spielberg supports P&S DVDs.

Yes, that's right. Steven Spielberg is James Bond.

Hey, Captain Genius; it's not "product placement" when the studio pays the product owner. But, still, I'll respond to this, because it's the smartest point you made.

He WHAT?!?! OK, it's back on now! :D

Re: Spielberg - hypocrite?
 

We've all heard great commentary tracks from directors that really have a good sense for viewers want to hear, what is informative and/or entertaining. And we've all heard many that don't even have enough content for a 10 minute documentary.

Some director's are good at talking off-the-cuff about their movies, others drone on needlessly about matters nobody cares to hear.

Maybe Spielberg feels his strength is not in talking off-the-cuff, he think he is better at assembling a documentary/featurette where he can prepare and edit his words and he stop when he is done, not feel compelled to keep talking because the credits are still 45 minutes away.

Maybe he thinks his style of commentary would be a distraction, whereas he finds Lean's to be engaging...

I've never heard Spielberg's exact words on the subject of him doing commentaries. But regardless of what the exact words were, the context or meaning could have been something to this effect: "I think a commentary track by me would be a distraction."

Let us not forget that Spielberg was a major proponent of the hell spawn that was DIVX. I think he still holds the grudge of its failure against DVDs.

Discuss.

The guns were not replaced because they were fake, they were replaced because their presence was not realistic.

Police would not use their sidearms against children on bicycles, much less the shotgun from their cruiser. There are rules to escalation of force that the police must follow. They cannot pull their guns on you if you call them a name. They must take appropriate action. Even today they must follow these rules, evven though today's teenager is a lot more dangerous than the teenager of 1984.

That aside, I would have no problem with SS changing the Shark in Jaws as long as the plot wasn't affected and the original cut was also readily available. In my mind though, the two are far from equal.

All that said, you are one of the treadcrappingest trolls I have ever seen here.

As evidenced by most of his films being on DVD in the form of special editions with reference quality video/audio, feature-length documentaries, and other extras...

Are you on dope?

Re: Spielberg - hypocrite?
 

You make a valid point. Spielberg could have said that it was wonderful without referring to commentaries.

Boba Fett rules!

Steven Spielberg watches Lawrence of Arabia before making a film, by the way. I'm not sure, but I think he owns his own print of the restored version.

Back on topic I want to say only this:

While Spielberg refuses to do commentary tracks, it's not a big deal because he does 60 to 120 minute documentaries on nearly all his films. These are better than commentaries.

Can anyone tell me why you would want a commentary when the docuemtaries already tell you so much?

Where did that come from?

I'm not knocking his documentaries, as indeed they are pretty good. I am knocking the fact that he lambasted commentaries and then turned around and held them up in the highest regard. John Kerry does not own an SUV, but his family does!
<P>Again, these are comments that I recall back when Saving Private Ryan (cough*Limited Edition*cough) came out with one crummy little fluff docu. If I am wrong I will take it all back.

Jango Fett.

With a little help from the Kaminoans.

I hold far more against Spielberg for P&S releases then I do the lack of commentaries, but that LOA comment has been a bitter pill since I first read it a few years ago. I do love Spielberg's documentaries, but there's something about a commentary that no amount of extras can replace. It's like the director is right there, as Spielberg experienced himself.


And as for Federal Agents brandishing weapons at kids, they sure as hell would if they had an extra-terrestrial. All you have to do is see how far the government is going to keep the public from seeing the returning dead from Iraq, and it's not a stretch to say they'd shoot their own grandmother if she had an alien in the basket of her bike.

This is the only remotely interesting thing I've read in this entire thread. Do you have more info? I knew Criterion was planning to do a Schindler LD at one point but I hadn't heard anything about the commentary (or lack thereof) causing it to fall through.

No further info, but I'd heard about that too awhile back. Criterion was going to do a big box, but without a commentary they felt it wouldn't have sold well enough.

I probably read it in a Spielberg thread years ago complaining about the lack of commentaries :lol:

In case you don't remember, ET was made in and takes place in the early 1980's. Federal agents would not be threatening kids on bikes with their guns during bright daylight in a residential area. Not to mention the fact that they had no reason to believe the road block wouldn't work so they wouldn't be set up with their guns like somebody was trying to drive a car through a barricade.

No, but as has already been mentioned, they might want to protect themselves against an alien from outer space who as far as they knew might be dangerous to both the FBI and the children. And the FBI never pointed the guns at the children, the barrels were pointed into the air.

It's kinda like in "Aliens" when the Marines are ordered to not use their guns when they're going into the chamber full of aliens: "What do they want us to use, harsh language?"

Are great white sharks even remotely close to extinction?

I find the change to walkie talkies irritating too, but unlike George Lucas, Steven Spielberg made the change as an option. The original version of "E.T." is readily available to everyone who wants to see it, so get over it.

Pretty dispicable accusation there, and one that is rooted in your own ignorance.

Spielberg has not made one dime from "Schindler's List." All of his share of the profits have been donated to the Shoah Foundation, among other charities.

Karo syrup is used for blood. Glycerin is used for tears. Just FYI.

So then who cares if they're there?

:up:
Well said Salty

When did he ever "lambast" them? He just doesn't do them. He's never said that they are wrong or evil or that other directors shouldn't do them.