Spielberg - hypocrite?
 

Was watching through some of the extras on the OOP Lawrence of Arabia the other day and one of them is an interview with Steven Spielberg. My initial thought is "What the he!! does he have to do with this movie?" That was answered as he took part in the restoration (and was very influenced by the movie). However . . . he talks about showing the restored print to David Lean and how Lean talked through the whole showing, (paraphrasing) "it was like a commentary on a DVD and it was fantastic!"
<P>Didn't Spielberg say that he wouldn't do commentaries because they take away from the magic of the film? Why is it good for him and not for us? If I'm wrong here please correct me.

Don't strain yourself setting up those straw men...

That dirty rat!

I'm setting up a fire pit. everyone bring your $pielberg materials for a burning.

He said it was LIKE a commentary on a DVD. Not that he DID a commentary on a DVD.

Also, he said he threw away his purple hearts after 'Nam.

I think that's what he's trying to say. He liked hearing a commentary, but he wont do one.. Thus he is evil.. EVIL!!!!!


In all truths, perhaps he believes that his films don't need one. Let the material go and speak for itself. If you want insight about the making of and all that sort of goodies watch the extra features that will more then likely contain that sort of material.

I'm pissed as he!! at this showing of hypocrisy!

"Armstrong, meet Stretch."

Who wouldn't want to be there watching a classic movie while the director was right there beside you talking about? I mean what do you want him to say, that he wished David Lean would shutup because it was taking away the magic of the movie?

As soon as I read the thread title I knew it was gonna be about this. Well its very simple to understand. Spielberg is very insecure about his talents, he does not want some young filmmaker to watch Indiana Jones and listen to the commentary and then go out and make "The Next Great Adventure!"

oh my god..... he's a human being!

He obviously prefers having documentaries on his DVD's rather than a commentary.

While it's not bad to have both, the documentaries on Spielberg's DVD's are usually top-notch and likely just as good as a commentary.


The same people who complain about the lack of commentaries would probably be the same ones complaining if his commentaries were mediocre.

If I were Spielberg I would be too busy bathing in my money and having violent sex with Cate Capshaw to do silly commentary for DVD nerds ;)

But seriously, it would be cool if he did commentary but hey, watcha gonna do...

Duel, Jaws, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, Raiders of the Lost Ark, E.T., Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, Jurassic Park, Schindler's List, Saving Private Ryan.

Yep, pretty few movies of note.

Then why did you call him an ass?

You must not have seen many movies before E.T. then. Rent Moonraker sometime.

Nah, I wouldn't look too deep into it. Personally, I just think he's defensive about his own filmmaking techniques and doesn't want people to overanalyze (and possibly copycat) his tactics. Spielberg happens to be very outspoken about other classics and is open to discussion when it comes to other films. He's just not keen to divulging his own secrets and critiquing his own work, and that's certainly not an industry first.

Canceling pre-order...

wow.

i'll never, ever look at Hollywood the same way again... -ohbfrank-

thanks Abob Teff. :(

I don't even know where to start...

1. "few and far between" huh? The guy has had an incredible string of hits going back 30 years. There isn't a director alive who wouldn't give his left nut to have half of the 'home runs' that Stevie has...

2. respect. If you respect someone who you'd call an a$$, I'd love to hear your thoughts on directors you despise.

3. 'wouldn't put it past him'... he has had a VERY consistent view of commentary tracks going back to the early 1990s (laserdisc days). He won't do them. He hasn't wavered on this once, he's had a very lucrative release fall through because of it (the Criterion Schindler), and yet he's still getting accused of setting up double-dips? That's one friggin' long-term plan, then, my friend.

4. Practically invented product placement. That particular practice existing long before E.T. ever chopped down on some candy.


The guy doesn't like to do commentary track for his movies. He's been very upfront (and consistent) about it. Instead, he often gives us fantastic documentaries that are often longer than the films they explain. I think that's a pretty decent trade-off, myself.

That comment shuts down this whole thread. There simply is no arguing with that.
<P>This whole thing did not go the way that I expected, so I'm resorting to just thinking about Darkfriend's observations. :beer:

Hey Abob Teff, let's hope Spielberg gets tired of Capshaw (believe me, eventually he will) and then he can do commentary while bathing in his money (that will stay).

Capshaw... hmm... yeah, she's got broadband.

Dear lord, people need to GET OVER THIS. The second anyone references this as anything but a joke you come off like a fanboy nerd and flush all the legitimacy of anything you say down the toilet! This change was made but it did not have any type of impact on the plot whatsoever at all. None. Zero. SS has said that if the authorities were after teenagers they would not be brandishing weapons at them. He realized it after the film was done and HE IS CORRECT. The "corrected" version is in fact CORRECT.

-notrolls-

[QUOTE]Originally posted by cokekiller

Quote:

---

That hits it right on the nose. He doesn't want people to overanalyze because it will expose the shallowness that runs thru almost every one of his movies. it all depends on whether you respect the abilitiy to tell a story...or the ability to pander to the lowest common denominator to make as much money as possible. I respect the ability to do both. He seems to only be able to do one or the other most of the time. That is where the term a$$ comes from. I look forward to his movies and usually enjoy them. I love a lot of his movies. I just wish he would wield the cheese/sap knife more so we wouldn't have to roll our eyes so often ;-)

---

ok, alot of the post was silly but i think he totally nails it here. i dont think its why Spielberg wont do commentary but it sums up my feelings on Spielberg the filmmaker.

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.