This is something I’ve been contemplating for a few years, especially with his recent fascination with biopics and dramas. It’s fitting, especially given that it’s the high peak of Oscar season at the moment, but I think this could’ve been written at any time. It could’ve been written in 2011 following the release of War Horse. It could’ve been written in 2012 following the release of Lincoln. It could’ve even been written in 2015 following the release of Bridge of Spies. However, I decided to get around to it following this review of last year’s The BFG, a movie I thought was fine, yet was disheartened to see used as a springboard for a discussion of whether or not Spielberg’s still relevant.
As a disclaimer, I have nothing but the utmost respect for Doug Walker and his crew. I think he’s insightful as a commentator, and his editorials are as on-point as his Nostalgia Critic reviews. But I’d be lying if I said that his 80’s childhood bias isn’t grating. It’s not inherently bad, as I also have nostalgia for my 90’s childhood, but when it gets in the way of being fair and honest, then there’s a serious problem.
Steven Spielberg is one of the four, major “Movie Brats” of the 70’s and 80’s that include George Lucas, Francis Ford Coppola and Martin Scorsese. (One could make the case for Woody Allen too, but he really got his start in the late-60’s and isn't relevant here.) He’s also, not surprisingly, the one that’s endured the longest in the hearts of Western film buffs. This is because Francis Ford Coppola eventually petered out, while George Lucas never grew beyond Star Wars and Martin Scorsese largely only caters to a certain subset of film-goers. Spielberg’s biggest strength was that he was willing to diversify, something made easier by the Hollywood of the 70’s and 80’s allowing for that. So while Spielberg could one day make a sci-fi thriller like Close Encounters of the Third Kind, he could follow it up another day with a family-film like E.T. the Extra Terrestrial, a family-horror film like Jurassic Park and a straight-up drama like Schindler’s List.
This has also led to his fair share of criticism. For one, he’s been accused of simplistic sentimentalism, especially in-relation to his peers. Spielberg VS Kubrick debates still take place online, even though Spielberg and Kubrick were friends and admired one-another greatly. And two, people keep arguing that he’d peaked in the 80’s and 90’s, and that everything post-2001 was him “petering out”. That’s where the conflict of the video I mentioned earlier comes into question, as I believe it’s arrogant to claim that a director you used to love is a hack because they don’t cater to you anymore (in that vein, see James Cameron and Avatar.)
Now, I’m the kind of film-goer who doesn’t care about genre, so long as it’s good. It could be fantasy, sci-fi or drama, I’ll watch it if it’s worth my time. Even sports movies, which I’m not the biggest fan of, will catch my interest from-time-to-time, with Rush being one of my favourite biopics of the last 5 years. So Spielberg being my fancy in any form is expected, be it fantasy, sci-fi, or hard drama, and I really wish that many of his fans would appreciate his different flavours. Unfortunately, they don’t.
On one hand, I can see why they don’t. There was a period of time, right between Catch Me If You Can and Lincoln, where he was struggling to make films that pleased both audiences and critics alike. Spielberg being all-over qualitatively is nothing new, his filmography has always been hit-or-miss, but that 10 year window of time was a real challenge for him. In fact, Spielberg’s highest-rated film of that era, Munich, still received fairly-mixed reviews, and it’s not hard to see why. So yeah, claims of “artistic stagnancy” aren’t unfounded.
On the other hand, they’re complete bupkis for three reasons. Firstly, Spielberg has, like I said, always been hit-or-miss. We remember his work fondly, but for every Raiders of the Lost Ark or Jaws he had a 1941 or Always. Even Hook, which many people my age remember fondly, wasn’t exactly a masterpiece. Spielberg’s directorial body of work is massive, so there are bound to be quite a few misses.
Two, the complaints against Spielberg existed before he was “stagnant”; in fact, the early days of his career were met with much skepticism from old guard critics, many of whom thought he was childish and shallow. I think the opening of this 1981 review of Raiders of the Lost Ark tells all:
“Even before you see Raiders of the Lost Ark, after you’ve read the ads and gotten some sense of the reviews, you know that the picture is offering you a pact: you agree to be a kid again, in return for which Raiders will give you old-time movie thrills expressed in slick modern cinematic terms.
No, thanks.”
I try to give critics the benefit of the doubt, since they get enough crap from moviegoers as is, but this opening reeks of “Spielberg didn’t make my kind of movie”. Ironically, I hear this claim now too, except that it’s the reverse. Where as Raiders of the Lost Ark, once considered a waste because it “was too silly”, is now looked upon as a serial-action masterpiece, Lincoln, a talk-heavy biopic, is considered a waste because “it’s too serious”. And the group defending the former is the one condoning the latter!
And thirdly, it’s Steven Spielberg. The man has earned the right to make whatever kind of movie he wants. So what if The Terminal, War of the Worlds, Munich, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, War Horse and The Adventures of Tintin were all only okay? Have you seen Lincoln and/or Bridge of Spies? And yeah, The BFG wasn’t anything great, but so what?
I think we also forget that Spielberg crafting dramas is nothing new. The 80’s might’ve seen the emergence of E.T. the Extra Terrestrial and the Indiana Jones franchise, but in-between that and Jurassic Park he was crafting dramas like The Color Purple and Empire of the Sun, films that launched the careers of Whoopi Goldberg and Christian Bale into the mainstream. He even followed up Jurassic Park with Schindler’s List in the same year! Dramatic Spielberg is still Spielberg, regardless of whether or not fans will admit it.
So no, I don’t think Steven Spielberg has become irrelevant. But if you’re concerned, his next film, Ready Player One, is based on a sci-fi novel. And after that, he’s making another Indiana Jones movie. Have fun!
No comments:
Post a Comment