Subscriptions
RSS
Can Spielberg Be Topped?
No, I don’t mean sexually.
Chris and I recently discussed Steven Spielberg’s extensive legacy. At one point, Chris said, “Spielberg is to movies what the Beatles are to music. You can follow in his footsteps, but you cannot top him.”
Much depends on how you rate Spielberg among the greatest directors of all time … and how you view the new crop of up-and-coming directors.
Both Chris and I agree that Spielberg is the greatest film director of all time (I can almost hear a bowel-loosening moan from Jeffrey Wells at Hollywood Elsewhere over that one). While there have certainly been better individual directing jobs by other directors, no director has ever put together a body of work as diverse, riveting, adventurous, and passionate as the Bearded One.
Not Ridley Scott. Not Stanley Kubrick. Not Alfred Hitchcock. Not John Ford. Not even Michael Bay.
What are your favorite Spielberg films and moments?
I tend to break down Spielberg’s career into three “periods.” The first runs from 1974-1989, and of course includes some of the greatest hits in motion picture history: JAWS, CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND, RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK, and ET THE EXTRATERRESTRIAL. The second period runs from 1989-1999, and features more thematic diversity in films like JURASSIC PARK, SCHINDLER’S LIST, and SAVING PRIVATE RYAN. His third period runs from 1999 to the present, and reveals a growing maturity and cynicism in films like MINORITY REPORT, A.I. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, and MUNICH.
I am personally much more of a fan of Spielberg’s early period with a few exceptions, primarily because I grew up during this time and learned to love films along with the images and thrills concocted by him.
I’m not sure what I consider his best overall film, but I think I consider E.T. The Extraterrestrial his best overall directing performance in his early years. In that, not only did he manage to sell another rubber puppet to massive audiences (JAWS was, of course, the first), but he also managed to coax perfect performances from three relatively inexperienced child actors. Sure, the movie is blatantly manipulative - ALL of Spielberg’s films can be labeled that way - but, unlike other films of this sort, the manipulation is in service of something deeply-felt and honest.
However, it’s hard not to give love to some of these amazing moments:
In the second period of his career, I think SCHINDLER’S LIST is his best directing performance overall, although both JURASSIC PARK and SAVING PRIVATE RYAN have amazing sequences in them.
In the third period of his career, my favorite Spielberg film is MINORITY REPORT because it combines his gift for populist adventure with a newfound sense of dread and gloom.
However, WAR OF THE WORLDS and MUNICH, though flawed, had bravura sequences in them:
Even A.I., which might be the worst Spielberg film since HOOK, had some magnificent moments in it until the last fifteen minutes:
I think the evidence is overwhelming in support of Spielberg’s directorial dominance. So the question becomes: Can Spielberg’s career be topped?
Out of the current crop of wannabe inheritors of his throne, none yet show the power and breadth of Spielberg’s work. Of them, I think M.Night Shyamalan has the visual instincts to match Spielberg, but his ego and his creative inflexibility have thus far stifled his ability. Directors like Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez have the creative energy, but neither the visual power nor the dramatic seriousness to equal Spielberg; they both seem to be too immersed in gimmicks. Guillermo Del Toro might eventually show himself to be a Spielberg, but most of his career has been based on junk thus far, capped by one true work of art in PAN’S LABYRINTH.
At this point in time, the only true heir to Spielberg are the Coen Brothers. They have amassed an impressive body of work over the years which combines the visual pizzaz of Spielberg’s best work with a deeply moralistic thoughtfulness.
What do you think? Can Spielberg EVER be topped? Do we have anyone who can challenge him? Ever?
Last 5 posts by Ray
- Why STAR TREK Fails - November 17th, 2008
- Useless Tube - November 17th, 2008
- Hold Me Closer, Tiny Dicker - November 14th, 2008
- What The Deficit Means To You - November 13th, 2008
- Stealing Movies - November 12th, 2008
Comments
11 Responses to “Can Spielberg Be Topped?”
Leave a Reply
There’s no doubt that Spielberg is the best director of all time. Nobody can touch his body of work, atleat not right now. However, I do think that somebody will eventually come along and be better. It always happens.
First you had Orson Wells and John Ford both were great and really came into their own in the 40’s. Then Hitchcock came along and topped both of them. Hitchcock really came into his own in the 50’s and it took at least another decade for the next great director to come along, Stanley Kubrick, good as Kubrick was he still wasn’t as good as Hitchcock.
After that their was alot of good directors, but none were able to but together a great body of work, until Spielberg. In that case it was 20 years between when Kubrick was at his best, until Spielberg hit his stride in the 80’s. So, I think somebody will eventually top Spielberg. It may take a while for it to happen, but it will happen.
The best current choice to top Spielberg, in my opinion, is Chris Columbus. He has quietly put a pretty impressive sting of movies together. He directed Adventures In Babysitting, Home Alone, The first two Harry Potter movies and Rent. I know those aren’t all great, but he keeps getting better and I see alot of potential in his work.
I think Ron Howard, Peter Jackson and David Fincher are a few more possibilities and it’s too bad Clint Eastwood is so damn old, because he has made some pretty good movies.
@ Eric - Chris Columbus??? Please say you’re joking.
Fincher was one I forgot to mention. Good catch.
Ron Howard has just about zero thematic depth to his work; Robert Zemeckis has become obsessed with playing with his gizmos and has seemingly forgotten how to make a normal movie with an actually coherent story (besides which none of his films are as morally interesting as Spielberg’s, and none of his films even begin to reach Spielbergian heights–though the original Back to the Future and Death Becomes Her are good efforts); David Fincher is a fine filmmaker in his own right but he’s going to have to get going at a much greater pace to even begin to compare (though I think Se7en and Zodiac are great films).
One of the most amazing aspects of Spielberg is that he’s only 61. Sidney Lumet and Clint Eastwood are making either at least respectable or excellent films and they’re much older. In the end, it may be Spielberg who tops Spielberg.
Chris Columbus? Really? That’s an answer? The guy makes okay family films, that’s it. His top film, which I guess would be the first HP, wouldn’t rank in Spielberg’s top 15.
Coen Brothers, probably not… and they’re my personal favorite filmmakers. If Ridley Scott had another 10 classic films in him, maybe. Ford, Hitchcock, Kurosawa, Bergman, Billy Wilder all with extremely impressive filmographies, but they don’t match up. Scorsese is probably the 2nd best director during the same time period and he’s about 10 classic films behind Spielberg as well.
As for the newer guys: Peter Jackson is a minor possibility, if he can get over his ego, and keep making great films for another 20 years. Fincher doesn’t turn out enough films. Same with PT Anderson. Seems like most young Auteurs don’t turn around films quick enough to even begin to reach the breadth of his work.
I personally don’t think his body of work will ever be topped. Who else can claim to have made so many Top 10’s: Family film: E.T. - Action: Raiders - Horror: Jaws - Sci-Fi: Close Encounters - War film: Saving Private Ryan - Drama - Schindler’s List - Summer Blockbuster: Jurassic Park -
He excels in every genre. And he’s got another 20-30 years in him, and he’s still turning the films out quicker than most. Who knows what classics lie ahead, he’s in a very interesting state in his career.
And this doesn’t even touch the list of films he’s influenced as a Producer as well.
Best. Director. Ever. Period.
(Great article by the way.)
Glad to see another person (Ross) point out that Spielberg has a looong road to yet travel and I think he is only becoming a better, more accomplished and more confident filmmaker.
Oh, and I just had to say that I think A.I. is one of Spielberg’s very best films and will most likely be considered as such in the not so distant future. The including portion, or movement of which you speak, is the coda that defines the film and distills its essence. It’s also horribly misunderstood.
It’s a terrific article and discussion, but ultimately I don’t think that an answer can be found. To “top” Spielberg suggests that it’s possible to exceed both his success as well as his artistic sensibilities, and there’s simply no way to do both. I can point to moments or sequences or plot devices that are far better than Spielberg in a Scorsese film - or a Fincher or Del Toro or Eastwood or the Coens (but NOT, emphatically, Columbus). I’ll take an entire NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN above even SCHINDLER’S LIST simply because it spoke a bit more deeply to me and I’d foresee watching it more often and getting more out of it than LIST in the future.
But none of that means anything. It’s all art, and to suggest that one artist can top another is a fun, but endless, exercise. Each of the other directors cited here - Hitchcock, Kubrick and even Tarantino - will hold their own places in film history for the influence they’ve had, and one really can’t quantify such effects. And by the way, influence like that can also be a bad thing (I’m looking at you, Bay).
If you’re only talking about historic blockbuster success, however, that’s pretty simple. Spielberg’s the king now and far into the future.
Great points Burbanked.
We have to admit that Speilberg still has many more films in him. The re is always that he will make Hook 2 and 1942, but I doubt it. He is very aware of his legacy at this point and cares very much about it, unlike George Lucas. I think we will continue to see top quality work out of him, if not continued greatness, in the future.
Which brings me to another point. If you going to top the Beatles you need to start when you are young and keep churning out greatness all the time. While some of the names mentioned above, Tarintino, Del Torro, Shamalan, most of these names are no longer young enough at this point to equal Speilbergs output. The would have had to do a whole lot more films to this point to be comparable.
You can’t hit your first major league home run at 30 and expect to top Hank Aaron. Yes Hank Aaron.
While it is not a requirement that the heir to Speilberg top him in number of films directed, totaly library is definatly a consideration. Consistency is the name of the game. Not aceivement in one film, otherwise we could have handed the award to Orsen Welles 70 years ago and forgotten about it.
I not want to start talking about a director’s “Vision” but I also don’t want to start talking about his “Purpose” and so, ack, I’ve just left myself with nothing to talk about except Butts In The Seats, and Stevie has already shown himself Past Master of That Art.
Call him what you will, he keeps on poking and prying at new avenues and ways. Yeah, sure, he’s got the cash for it, and yeah, sure, he got that cash by playing us, but I don’t grudge it, because I got MY money’s worth (and so did my parents, by the way, the story of the-first-time-my-dad-saw-Raiders would convince you there is still Good In The World)…so yeah.
Shit. I’m talking about Purpose, aren’t I?
Best. Director. Ever. —- Just. Don’t. Blow It. We’ll. Be. Watching….
I think Schindler’s List is one of the most powerful films ever made. As a result, I can only see it at best once a year. It’s already been almost twenty-six months since I last saw it. Whereas I could see No Country for Old Men a bunch more times. It’s a vastly more accessible film.
They’re both great, and they even both share many key elements (how depraved humanity can and will be, for starters) but it’s difficult to judge them against one another in this regard. It’s not as extreme as, say, Raiders of the Lost Ark vs. Sansho the Bailiff but it’s nothing to sneeze at, either.
Considering the role Spielberg has been on for a while now, I suspect Kingdom of the Crystal Skull will be an excellent summer blockbuster, while The Trial of the Chicago 7 pushes the boundaries of his maturity in new directions and Lincoln and Interstellar both change the way we look at him right now. When he starts getting on a roll like this, it’s very fun to watch him climb another mountain.
He assumes a work load that would make a director in his ’20s or ’30s submit from exhaustion.
(and so did my parents, by the way, the story of the-first-time-my-dad-saw-Raiders would convince you there is still Good In The World)
Jeez, Megan, I hope you’re about eight years old or else I just seriously realized what a frigging old fart I am.