How will Spielberg be viewed once he passes

what will his legacy be?

Other urls found in this thread:

newyorker.com/magazine/2017/01/16/steven-spielberg-at-seventy
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

As a great director who influenced a lot of mediocre to bad ones to produce soulless studio franchises.

Being the man that launched the concept of the Blockbuster

If the next Indiana Jones sucks, he'll be viewed as an 80's auteur who became a populist. If it somehow manages to be high art and a tribute to the old serials, he'll go out with a bang.

Jurassic Park will be his legacy.

regardless of how sh*tty the next indy is, it doesn't effect his GOAT level status


dude did Schindler's List and Jurassic Park in the same year

Did Raiders
Jaws
E.T

he is already one of the GOATS

He will be viewed as the American Jimmy Savile

As the guy who always had germans as the bad guys in all of his movies

Yeah, he won't recede necessarily but they say most Artists peak in their thirties don't they? Actually I think his next historical film could be a classic.

Indiana Jones will be his legacy

Short term:
Director who started very strong, but lost it as he got older

Medium term:
Great director who created the blockbuster

Long term:
The creator of the blockbuster

only old people care about indiana jones

Schindlers list
Saving Private Ryan
Being a big nosed jew

Indiana Jones 2 was the only real adventure movie of the Indy movies.

Prove me wrong

Strictly speaking that was Star Wars, in a universe with a god it should have been Sorcerer.

Kinauteur. Strange that he only has maybe a decade left in him.

Interesting recent NYer piece on him if anyone's interested

newyorker.com/magazine/2017/01/16/steven-spielberg-at-seventy

Spielberg is finished desu

Make a movie with your bitch.


Steven Spielnigga.

The guy that defined 3 decades of commercial film.

The guy who made one good film.

The terminal will be his legacy

People will eventually come to view Schindler's List as Jewish propaganda, and is will gradually become disreputable.

>How will Spielberg be viewed once he passes
In a coffin.

DELET

The man who kept making the same movie since Schindlers List

as the guy who directed the first episode of Columbo

> This was the man who turned down directing James Bond and Star Wars

I'm pretty sure it was Jaws in 1975, a full 2 yeaes before Star Wars. Also
>it should have been Sorcerer
This. Sorcerer deserves more attention. What an amazing movie. A shame it flopped and killed Friedkin's career.

Jaws was super popular and made the summer movie season, but star wars is what had people lining up around the block, which is where the term block buster originated.
I like to imagine a parallel universe where star wars wasn't saved in editing, and we got a few decades of Lucas as a working director, fighting against the studio system and making American Graffiti tier films, and where Sorcerer became a financial success and created a template for the next generation of filmmakers to follow.

He'll be remembered as one of the Greats with 80s & 90s commercial cinema really defined by him.

He invented blockbuster films. He arguably destroyed and exploited cinema that was an artform by making Jaws.
He is the father of making money by creating artful lowbrow entertainment and he managed to make people believe his films are art.

Tl;dr He shaped and created commercially successful modern filmmaking.

>populist
This is the most retarded pretentious word thrown around these days. Everything in film is fucking populist, you pricks. And all fucking politics is populism.

*tips fedora*

He made Jurassic Park so he'll always be great in my eyes

Munich is underrated

What? Did some of the words in my post have too many letters for you?

*teleports behind you*

As the impotent Jewrat pedophile who got off on shilling for shitskin "refugees" rape of Europe.

Being a jew who made movies to greedily swallow up as many shekels as possible.

Fuck you say bro?

Even in the 2010s he's still good
>Lincoln
>Bridge of Spies

Jaws is cinema at its finest you pleb

First director to make mainstream films financially successful while at the same time having cinematic worth, not all his films obviously. But Close Encounters, Jaws, Raiders, ET, Jurassic Park, Schindlers List, Saving Private Ryan will be go down in history.

This guy's right.
Close Encounters is his only good film.

I agree. We live in the worst timeline.

One of the greatest, but no THE GOAT. Unless you meaning living directors then yes.

We won't get another great director like him in decades.

He is right though.

But even his blockbuster films still had a lot more meaning than whatever crap we get today.

Hopefully his legacy will be being viewed as one of the more versatile directors Hollywood has seen. Few are prolific across so many genres. Really one of the few unifying themes across his works is a sort of sentimentality, but even that is strong given the complexities in films such as Munich which is wholly unsentimental.

I'm not sure that Sorcerer would have been a huge sucess, even if Star Wars never existed. It's pretty alienating to mainstream audiences. They don't speak english for at least 20 or 30 minutes into the movie. People got confused going into this movie thinking it was some foreign art film, and walked out. Even though it's a remake of a film based on a book, it's very ambitious, and intentionally slow. Most people would think it's boring. It would still probably find an audience way later and be a cult classic, like it is now. But I would rather have movies inspired by Sorcerer than some bullshit like Star Wars The Force Awakens or some remake. When will Hollywood realize creativity and director driven films can work and make money again?

Jaws is an actual good film that inspired executives and other directors to make lowest common denominator garbage for over 40 years at the expense of good directors and audiances, that eat this shit up willingly

Was that movie any good? Looked kind of dull desu

There's a timeline nearly identical to ours where baneposting doesn't even exist.

I really miss that era of Spielberg from the late 90s into the early 2000s, and those action movies like Minority Report and War of the Worlds. Now he's stuck making shit nobody cares about like Bridge of Spies, BFG, and that Ready Player One movie.

For you

>star wars is what had people lining up around the block, which is where the term block buster originated.
you literally dont know what youre talking about
Jaws is known to everyone as the first blockbuster. its not up for debate. it is categorically considered the first blockbuster film.
star wars picked up steam after it was released. jaws was marketed as an experience and an event, which is why it was enormous from day one.

>lucas asked spiel to direct star wars
>no george, its your film. you need to do it.
>ok stevey
>lucas gives it to somebody else anyway

Funny thing is that you're the actual pleb and your post proves it.

Is Lincoln any good? Anybody here seen it?

bit of a snore fest

>we could have had Spielberg direct the prequels
>he should have directed TFA
I heard he did ghost direct some stuff for ROTS. Is this true? If it is does anyone know what?

It's like reading a history book. Kind of like history books but it's not something you HAVE to see, or watch multiple times.

His life's work obviously

he directed the scene where yoda turns out to be a mech powered by the kyber crystal from palpatines saber but it got cut

He doesn't make the stuff he puts his name on. He's just a producer. How many shitty movies and tv shows did he produce over the years?

bump

Same with saving Private Ryan, the Germans never scream in pain and bleed, diminishing their presence by diminishing their suffering. And are completely demonized, such as with the surrendering soldier that betrayed the squad and shot Tom Hanks. It is very clear he has deep-seated problems as a Jewish man.

holy shit i remember this game

Nothing wrong with Schindler's List.

He will be remembered as great director but nobody will ever be able to remember what movies he actually directed.
His only legitimate masterpiece, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, will be forgotten. He will forever be that guy who did Jaws and Jurassic Park.

Jaws
Indiana Jones
Jurassic park
Saving private ryan.

He hasn't made a good movie in over 20 years. It's safe to say he's done

Tintin was great, plebstain. So was Munich. Sorry but your narrative doesn't fit.
But yeah, most of his later work sucks dick.

...

except Goeth being a ridiculous and over the top evil character performing unsourced evils in his camp and generally acting in a manner completely unrealistic for someone who has managed to rise to the rank of camp commander. Hes also stupid enough to get manipulated into killing less people by one little speech by Schindler. And even the good guy Schindler is shown in a negative light compared to the hard working jews.

Its a good movie, dont get me wrong, but the slant in favor of jews and in demonizing of the nazis is absolutely ridiculous. Theres not ONE german in the movie other than Schindler with any redeeming qualities.

>Saving private ryan

You blew it.

Everything this dude has done, have to go into the text book. The film schoolers around glob must cherish it for til a day they die & pass it on to the next generations !!!

From Jaws to Saving Private Ryan will be shown in reels. Everything else before and after will be ignored.

Indiana Jones is already outdated and they are not good enough for younger generations interested in film to see them. They are flicks. His legacy will be Jaws, Jurassic Park and E.T, mainly for innovation in special effects and because they were the most popular movies of their decades. Schindler's List will be viewed as a great movie as long as the jews manage to hold on to the "The nazis were the worst people in history" narrative.

Learn how to English, comrade.

Nobody cares about you or your great opinions.

Populism is a politcal rebellion against those who are in power - the elite. Which is why its becoming more and more retarded to use the term "right wing populist". It makes me rage whenever someone says that anti-immigration politics is "populism".

A great director who unwittingly ushered in the death of commercial film

>but the slant in favor of jews and in demonizing of the nazis is absolutely ridiculous. Theres not ONE german in the movie other than Schindler with any redeeming qualities.
But he chose to make a movie where the hero is GERMAN and a member of the NAZI party so how many more shades of gray do you want?

Greatest and must influential American director. The man who defined the 1980s

>It makes me rage whenever someone says that anti-immigration politics is "populism".

But it pretty much is, if the establishment consensus on immigration essentially boils down to "current levels plus a little more, or current levels and a lot more"

I mean he really did take pot shots at Jews from his roof, of course that doesn't mean he wasn't a 3 dimensional person but it kinda says a lot about the man.

The point is hes shown as an outstanding one-off, nothing like the average German. Thats not shades of grey when all the other german's happily and unflinchingly slaughter jews through the entire movie. And even Schindler breaks down in the end saying he should have done more (awful acting in this part btw), implying that even the non-jews who did what they could didnt do enough.

Meanwhile, actual jews like George Soros went around robbing fellow jews during the war and dont have any regrets about it. But thats a story we'll never get on the big screen.

>he really did do it

Source. Wikipedia lists a book written in 2004, ten years after the film, which literally in turn has the movie as its source. It' not real and would never have happened in a properly run camp by someone who had enough guile and intellect to rise to the rank of camp commander.

>The point is hes shown as an outstanding one-off
Because he was, i haven't seen the movie in years so i can't remember if all the other germans were portrayed as evil.
also >muh george soros
I'm sure a movie about him will be a hit.

>where Sorcerer became a financial success and created a template for the next generation of filmmakers to follow.

See this is interesting, I wrote an essay once about Sorcerer being a flop and how it may have affected things. The thing is, if you look at reviews from the time, it was received really badly. Not by the public, but by critics who should've known better. Both Star Wars AND Sorcerer were panned, but for different reasons.

In many ways Sorcerer came out too late, it's arguably the last great '70s' movie along with Heaven's Gate which really killed it all off. Both the public and critics seemed to have been done with the cynical, depressing attitude of most 70s American cinema that is praised now. But people had had enough of 'serious' films at that point and, judged by its own terms, Star Wars was seen as more successful and 'fresh' (which it was, at the time, think of previous sci-fi; Logan's Run came out in 1976 and it feels like it's from a different era).

What I'm saying is that there was no way Sorcerer would set a template, with or without Star Wars. People and critics were tired of a certain kind of filmmaking that was what Friedkin was all about. I'm not saying it's good I mean look at where Hollywood is at now, but...

Go watch some arthouse garbage and pretend you're 2 kool 4 skool elsewhere pleb

Did Spielberg ever advise George Lucas on any Star Wars stuff?
I feel like he's the only one who could have convinced George to release the theatrical versions on blu ray.

>Everything in film is fucking populist

This is patently untrue though, a lot of non-Hollywood cinema is not 'populist' (as in, it's not trying to pander to this or that group or the lowest common denominator). Some art film is, arguably (Haneke might be a good example), but plenty of film makers don't try to appeal to anyone in particular (Apitchatpong Weerasethakul came to mind).

The fact that it's a medium that can be easily understood by most everyone doesn't mean all film makers will use it that way.

A Jew

>When will Hollywood realize creativity and director driven films can work and make money again?

When movies with no creativity and 0 vision from the director's part will STOP making piles and piles of money, so, not anytime soon my man.
>if it ain't broke don't fix it

He was exceptional in the lengths he went and the means he had to help. That doesnt mean no other germans helped on a smaller scale where they could or at the very least showed pity or remorse for what the jews were experiencing.

Im not talking about a movie about George Soros personally, just a movie where a jew during WW2 acts in a villainous manner. RIght now if you just watch movies, and especially Spielberg movies, youd think all Nazis were literal Satan and every jew/ally was a hard working, perfectly ethical and overall top tier person. Imo that makes his WW2 movies a lot worse than they could have been.

If we're going literally by 'people lining up around the block', ironically Friedkin's earlier film, The Exorcist, was the first where people noticed that (it was in the news, in newspaper articles, in film reviews, etc.).

But yeah technically Jaws is the first summer blockbuster as we've come to know and love them.

My friend you need to watch Verhoeven's Black Book if you want some fun stuff about the Nazis and the Jews

Ba'al worship, child sacrifice

Maybe you aren't American
.

You're too dumb to even know what pleb means, holy shit.

close encounters will be his legacy