Spielberg Week!
This week we'll go through the filmography of one of the best directors of all time who has way too many movies to his name. Woah this took longer than I thought
Boy oh boy, have I missed this newsletter. It has only just hit me that I haven’t released a post in four weeks (my birthday). Pretty concerning if you ask me. It’s not that I haven’t been watching movies (I’m currently at 186 for the year), it’s just that I haven’t had the time to write about them.
But enough excuses. I’m back! And we’re starting with a look at one of the all-time directors: Steven Spielberg. Instead of doing a Directors Ranked post for Spielberg, I’m doing a brief write-up on films of his I haven’t seen. Doing a ranking of over 30 films is too much for me in all honesty1.
Why Spielberg? Because it’s Spielberg, the man who made Jaws, E.T., Indiana Jones, Jurassic Park, Schindler’s List, Saving Private Ryan and so much more. If you have even one of those films, you’re set for life as a director. But Spielberg made all of them (some at the same time). His filmography is unmatched.
With his latest release, The Fabelmans, Spielberg takes a direct look at himself in probably his finest work in the 21st century.
Here we go, these are the five new Spielberg films I watched:
Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977)
A-
Throughout the short history of this wonderful newsletter, one of the biggest things I’ve realized is that I HATE irrelevant storylines. So many decent films get derailed by extra story features that only serve to fill time. A prime example of this is the Marvel Cinematic Universe.
What I love about Close Encounters of The Third Kind is that the movie just doesn’t fuck around with irrelevant shit. The film is about a group of people who try to contact aliens. While there are a variety of characters with their storylines, all of them circle around finding and talking to the UFOs.
Take main character Roy Neary (Richard Dreyfuss) for example. He is left in awe by the experience of seeing these UFOs. So much so that he becomes obsessed, leading to his family totally abandoning him. While the scene where his wife and three children drive away is pretty sad, the morose feeling never lasts long as Roy truly had a date with destiny.
He literally decides to leave with the aliens at the film’s end. You never see a guy fully commit to this. It’s almost as if he concerned himself with the power of beauty and wonder in trying to understand these beings. It was so refreshing to see an alien movie that served almost as a metaphor for humans trying to understand their place in the universe. Hell, there aren’t really any villains in the story. By the end of the picture, the “evil” government figure (Francois Truffaut2) is supporting everyone’s endeavor to see and communicate with the aliens.
I say all this cosmic philosophy crap. But then there is the character of Jillian (Melinda Dillon), a mother who is trying to get her abducted son back. Jillian joins Roy on the quest to find the alien ships to find her child. While Jillian’s human concern for her kid goes against Roy’s otherworldly intentions, I truly believe Spielberg is striking at something deeper with this story.3
He examines how love is something cosmic and transcends space and time. Is it a little corny? Sure. But he shows it in such a visually astounding way and backs it up with some great character growth.
Minority Report (2002)
B+
Now here’s a film that I had a bad feeling I would hate, but actually kinda like. The story undoubtedly goes a little up its own ass, but it’s not that hard to follow and really had a captivating main character, John Anderton (Tom Cruise).
John is the chief of the precrime police program in Washington D.C. Precrime is precisely what it sounds like. The unit will arrest people before they commit a crime. They “know” these people will do unlawful deeds through three clairvoyants that can visualize the impending crimes. But John eventually gets picked by the three soothsayers and has to go on the run.
His cat-and-mouse game with DOJ agent Witwer (Colin Farrell) and others serves as a backdrop for Speilberg to touch on some of the grander aspects of our existence and future. The world the characters inhabit. Of course, the nitty-gritty details of 2054 will be different than what Speilberg portrays. But the constant presence of technology and personalized advertisements feels awfully similar to what we have now. Some of the tech in this film basically inspired people to invent that tech.
Minority Report, along with keeping up with Spielberg’s theme of broken families, also touches on free will. It’s a pretty basic look at choosing your life or the idea of cause and effect. Still, it’s fun to look at it through the lens of the future.
Spielberg typically knows better than to use too much shaky cam, but he has enough cool shots in the movie to do more than make up for it. The ugly colors of the future represent a semi-bleak outlook of the world we are heading toward.
But for having some pretty dark backstories and a desolate view of the future, Speilberg’s trademark sentimental ending feels a little out of place. He’s kind of the Stephen King of movies (Get it? Because they’re both named Stephen/Steven?). The endings kinda suck.
John defeating the villainous Lamar Burgess (Max Von Sydow) is not the issue I have. It’s his reconciliation with his wife that bothers me. John’s tragic backstory is slowly revealed in the standard way and clearly plays into the themes of the film. But the ending almost betrays that. The theme of broken families kind of goes down the shitter. Little too cheesy if you ask me.
1941 (1979)
C+
I love goofball comedies that kind of throw logic out the door. Films in the vein of Caddyshack or Airplane! are some of my favorites of all time. 1941 seems like it has the opportunity to be that with infinitely better cinematography. But even for goofers4, this one makes no sense.
The main problem is this…the love stories DO. NOT. MATTER. Ok, that might be harsh. It’s not that the romantic storylines don’t matter. They’re just really boring. For a film that’s about the Japanese invading Hollywood, there are barely any invasions. The Japanese, accompanied by evil Nazi Christopher Lee (Lee wasn’t a Nazi, I just don’t care to remember his character’s name), just sit in a submarine the whole time.
Instead, we’re stuck with two love stories happening at once. I don’t even care to know what their names are. By the 45-minute mark, I was just bored with them. The cool shit was happening with Captain Wild Bill Kelso (John Belushi). He is basically the crazy cowboy pilot in Dr. Strangelove turned up to a Belushi-style 11. But unfortunately, we only get five minutes of him. Tops. Motor Sergeant Frank Tree (Dan Aykroyd) is also a funny presence. But again, he’s barely in it.
Let’s sway away from the “comedy” and go back to filmmaking. When Wild Bill is flying around like a maniac, we get seem beautiful, sweeping shots of the desert. Even during the ballroom fight sequences (which aren’t very funny), we get clever shots that lead the viewer along. The script from Robert Zemeckis5 and Bob Gale may not make a lick of sense (or be comedic), but Spielberg’s knack for visual storytelling will help you along.
But alas, Spielberg’s direction can only do so much. At least some of my friends enjoyed this film a little more than me, but I can’t really get behind it.
Munich (2005)
B+
This film could have been so much better. Instead, I felt kind of bored watching Munich. The suspense wasn’t all that thrilling to me and I never could truly get behind the main characters. While the beginning is captivating, the second half of the film is where I really start to lose interest. It drags.
Don’t get me wrong there was still some stuff that was great. Spielberg crafted a movie that wanted to have the look and feel of a classic 1970s political thriller. The excellent camera zooms reminded me of Francis Ford Coppola’s The Conversation.
Avner Kaufman (Eric Bana) and his team of Israeli spies look to hunt down the Palestine Liberation Organization, the group responsible for the 1972 Munich Massacre. There is certainly an element of obsession, but Spielberg is smart enough to balance out the playing field, giving us the perspective of the Israelis and Palestinians. Giving us the Palestinian perspective, even for a moment, gives our protagonists a form of fallibility.
Kaufman leaves his family for decades in hunting the Palestine Liberation Organization. He never watches his children grow up. While the character is well-written, I’m not a fan of Bana. His dull expressions seep out any of the drama or gravitas. He doesn’t really need to act well in action sequences, which can be thrilling. But when he’s trying to convey the emotions of his character, Bana does a poor job. I kind of expect it from him.
Bana’s meh performance at least gets canceled out by the wonderful talents of Daniel Craig and Ciarán Hinds. Both of their characters, Steve (Craig) and Carl (Hinds) aren’t that well-written, but they both have solid acting chops to keep me mildly interested. Huh, I guess that’s the phrase I’ve been looking for: mildly interesting. Yeah, that seems right.
The Fabelmans (2022)
A-
The 2010s were undoubtedly pretty weird for Steven Spielberg. While I loved The Adventures of Tintin as a kid and found Lincoln pretty interesting because of Daniel Day-Lewis, there was a lot of crap. Bridge of Spies was super mid and I didn’t really care for The Post.
The 2020s have oddly been kinda awesome for Spielberg. West Side Story (2021) was not my cup of tea, but the filmmaking in it was second to none. The Fabelmans is where he really returns to form. He went to the one story he never told: himself.
Sammy Fabelman (Gabriel LaBelle) is a stand-in for Spielberg himself. We follow Sammy/Steven as he goes from first watching Cecil B. DeMille’s The Greatest Show on Earth, to becoming a full-time picturemaker. In between, we see Sammy struggling to deal with his parent’s marriage falling apart in some of the most emotional scenes in Spielberg’s filmography.
Spielberg, returning to write the screenplay with Tony Kushner, sets up a clear conflict in the opening minute, when the family is going to the theater. In describing movies, mother Mitzi Fabelman (Michelle Williams) is the artist, equating films to dreams. Meanwhile, the father, Burt Fabelman (Paul Dano), is the engineer. He breaks down how moving pictures are a grand illusion. The dynamic between art vs. science, and mother vs. father has defined Spielberg’s career and defines Sammy’s journey.
Dano is as great as always, but Williams6 really starts to go above and beyond as the film progresses. Her performance was shaky at first, but she taps into emotions that really only could be described by Spielberg himself.
But the family drama weirdly switches up halfway through and becomes a high school loser drama. The latter half of the film drags on a little too long for my liking, but Spielberg justifies it completely. The ending may not have been necessary, but I loved it so much with the super duper awesome cameo. Every moment and scene in this emotional rollercoaster feels intentional and brilliant.
When I saw this film on one of the biggest screens around Syracuse, I was surrounded by people all over the age of 50. Even if Spielberg may not entirely appeal to the younger generation, he still has a grasp on a vast majority of Americans. He really taps into something special because if you were born between 1960-2005, you have an endearing memory of a Spielberg film. Whether it be E.T., Jaws, Jurassic Park7 or even A.I., his films are embedded in your mind.
Another director I’ll probably do this for is Martin Scorsese. He’s a TON of films I haven’t seen and I could do it right around when Killers of the Flower Moon finally comes out.
You better believe I was stunned when I first found out that Francois Truffaut, one of the pioneers of the French New Wave, was in one of the starring roles for this American sci-fi classic. It really shows the draw of Spielberg and how much other directors respect the shit out of him.
Fun fact: This was the first of three films that Spielberg directed and wrote. The other two are A.I. Artificial Intelligence (2001) and The Fabelmans (2022). Fun how that works. Maybe Spielberg should write more often lol.
Interesting detail: Apparently Stanley Kubrick told Spielberg that 1941 should have been a drama. Comedies truly were never Spielberg’s thing.
Look, I don’t completely hate Zemeckis. Back to the Future is awesome. But boy does he have some stinkers and this is definitely one of his worse ones.
If Williams doesn’t get nominated for an Oscar, I will lose it. If she gets put into the Best Actress category, she should lose to Cate Blanchett (Go Tár!). But if she’s in Best Supporting Actress, she should absolutely win.
Also, I just wanna mention that he made Jurassic Park in the SAME YEAR as he made Schindler’s List. That is the most unbelievable fun fact in the world to me. If he ended up making both at different times, it would have been ok.