SCFZ

Lencho_of_the_Apes wrote: ↑Sun Jan 20, 2019 5:05 am I''m curious - is no-one liking Poltergeist, or is no-one considering it a Spielberg movie?

I mainly consider it a Tobe Hooper film

Spielberg's or not, I think Poltergeist is just a bad film. One of the worst horror films of the 80s.

I don't really think of it as a Spielberg movie or a Hooper movie exactly, sort of both and neither like with some of the other disputed claims around director credit. It feels like there's a bit of both in it, but that kind of crediting just doesn't interest me enough to bother sorting the details. I'd be fine with people including it on either directors list. Personally,
I don't know if I'd choose it anyway. It'd be more or less tied with a bunch of others for the fifth slot.

Seen 26.
1.Duel (1971)
2.Empire of the Sun (1987)
3. Jaws (1975)
4. Schindler's List (1993)
5. Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)

There are some relatively clear indicators that Poltergeist is Tobe Hooper's film; I continue to be offended by the presumption that Spielberg was more than a sub-in in times of intense duress on set. The surrounding narratives all contend that both were major forces on the work; there are a few faulty stories about Spielberg's directorial efforts and a few faulty but slightly less-so stories about Hooper's directorial efforts. Ultimately, we can fall back on that sequence in the center of the film that Tobe Hooper rewrote live because Spielberg's version wasn't working in the mouths of the actors, which also includes his trademark zoom in/zoom out dolly one take. There's one shot of the film that is irrevocably Spielberg's (that crane over the cul de sac that feels very much like something out of E.T.) and funnily enough that also happens to be the one shot that there's actually a photograph of Spielberg directing.... go figure.

But for what it's worth, I think Poltergeist is better than anything Spielberg has ever directed other than perhaps E.T. and it would take my #1 slot if we were considering it as such.

seen 23

1. A.I.
2. War of the Worlds
3. Jaws
4. Close Encounters of the Third Kind
5. War Horse

I've seen 25.

1. Schindler's List
2. E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial
3. Close Encounters of the Third Kind
4. Raiders of the Lost Ark
5. Minority Report

seen 10

1. Duel
2. The Jurassic Park
3. Jaws

Regarding whether Poltergeist is a "Spielberg" or "Hooper" film, my more extended thoughts are that this shows something of the problem of talking about authorship in movies as if it was like that of some other art forms. On the one hand, we could simply say the person credited with directing is the one deserving of the credit as they were given the role of responsibility even if they then delegated it or had it usurped by others. That's not very useful in tracking the ideas and images in the movie, but it more or less follows a chain of command notion of responsibility. Though perhaps more accurately still would be in noting that the person with the most power who takes an active hand in the production is the one responsible. Tom Cruise, for example, in his late career often had more say about his movies than the hired guns who directed, Harvey Weinstein made sure he kept some strong controls over the movies he produced.

On the other hand though there are so many different avenues of authorship in movies that in most cases simply leaving it at the director doesn't make sense. Producers have long been involved in the decision making on films, sometimes visually, more times in script and production decisions. Selznick is known for this and on the other side of things, it's hard not to give Val Lewton equal credit on the films he produced. Studios themselves often had "styles" that directors had to adhere to or work under. Actors too often shape the movies they work on, but neither of those last two seem to be especially notable for Poltergeist

Spielberg is often credited for working out storyboards for Poltergeist, that can shape a large part of how the movie plays, Just look to the career of William Cameron Menzies for example, and see how many of the movies he worked on have similar looks and feel that is often more notable than the contributions of the director matched against their other films. Poltergeist in some ways certainly does often look like a Hooper film judged on shots, but in other ways it more feels like a Spielberg one as judged by flow. I personally can't see it as being done the same way by either of them alone, so trying to give full credit to one over the other seems misguided, even as noting what elements seem more like one than the other can be instructive.

It reminds me a bit of the never ending to-do over One Hour with You that goes on between Lubitsch and Cukor supporters, each is certain their favored director is the one "really" responsible for the movie's success, when it's more likely each contributed to it and sharing the credit makes the most sense.

it doesn't look like we have enough views for michael snow poll, unless there's one more person who has seen 8+. i'll give snow a few more hours, but mesnalty - do you want to suggest a fallback director in case snow won't work?

CLOSE ENCOUNTERS
A.I. -- despite the finale.
WAR OF THE WORLDS -- despite that finale.

Haven't seen SCHINDLER'S LIST in way too long, too long to put it on this list. SAVING PRIVATE RYAN annoyed the hell out of me, the "Earn This!" Guilt Trip at the end is simply unforgivable. Never has so much talent in one filmmaker been squandered so stupidly on such abject crap as multiple Indiana Jones/Jurassic Park cashgrabs.

I imagine there's enough views for Breillat (I've seen 11), but in case there's not, I'll suggest Lynch as a fallback to the fallback.

I've seen 8 Michael Snow films!

Spielberg seen 18

1 E.T. The Extra Terrestrial
2 Jurassic Park
3 The Adventures of Tintin
4 Bridge of Spies
5 Minority Report

ok great - michael snow it is!

inspired by kanafani's stats showdown, a few more detailed notes on the poll results:

- lots of his films got no votes at all: Always, Hook, Jurassic Park: The Lost World, Amistad, The Terminal, Indy Jones and the Crystal Skull, The BFG, and The Post.

- spielberg has the most best-pic nominated films of any living filmmaker (three more than scorsese, the only person close), and the second-most in history (behind william wyler). his only best pic nominee that got no support at all in this poll was The Post, though our winner, and 60% of our top ten, didn't get nominated

- how many living hollywood filmmakers have produced two films in one year that would both fare well in one of our polls? spielberg did it twice (Schindler's List and Jurassic Park both from 1993, and Minority Report and Catch Me If You Can both from 2002, and War Horse and Tintin are also both in the list, from 2011). for godard or miike or any number of 1930s filmmakers that wouldn't be unusual, but i can't think of any other hollywood filmmaker working now who might match that.

results

1. AI (2001) -- 46 pts
2. Jaws (1975) -- 41 pts
3. Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981) -- 33 pts
4. Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977) -- 25 pts
5. Munich (2005) -- 19 pts
6. Minority Report (2002) -- 15 pts
6. Catch Me If You Can (2002) -- 15 pts
6. ET (1982) -- 15 pts
9. Duel (1971) -- 13 pts
10. Jurassic Park (1993) -- 11 pts
11. Bridge of Spies (2015) -- 10 pts
11. Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984) -- 10 pts
13. Schindler's List (1993) -- 10 pts
14. Empire of the Sun (1987) -- 8 pts
14. War of the Worlds (2005) -- 8 pts
16. Saving Private Ryan (1998) -- 7 pts
16. Adventures of Tintin (2011) -- 7 pts
18. Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989) -- 6 pts
19. Ready Player One (2018) -- 5 pts
20. Lincoln (2012) -- 3 pts
20. The Color Purple (1985) -- 3 pts
22. The Sugarland Express (1974) -- 2 pts
23. Murder by the Book (1971) -- 1 pt
23. War Horse (2011) -- 1 pt
23. 1941 (1979) -- 1 pt

If I hadn't forgotten about the end date for the poll, 1941 probably would have had my fifth vote and gotten a point. Dang it.

ah, i just counted your last vote as one for Lincoln, because it was the first film you mentioned in your list of candidates, but if you wanted to vote for 1941 instead, i'll update the results!

It was my bad, meant to actually cut the extra titles. But, yeah, 1941 is the sentimental choice, saw it at a drive in and enjoyed the experience probably beyond the worth of the film, but still like it for its excesses, stupid as some of them are.

up at letterboxd:

https://letterboxd.com/fliptrotsky/list ... s-poll-99/