Filmmaker Weakest Link: Steven Spielberg - The Finale

In the interest of good taste, I'll make no pun about the elimination of "Schindler's List". It was a close one, though.

So two of Spielberg's first five theatrical films end up as our finale. Not a shocker, though I admit I had no idea what the last two would've been - I think this was a wide-open WL.

Vote for the WEAKER of the two films!

Discussion:

1) What would your preferred final pair have been? And this can include films that were never part of the poll.

2) What did you THINK the final pair was going to be?

 

Voted off Raiders.

This would have been the final pair I would have picked. His two best films, and most representative of his peak legacy.

 

Raiders of the Lost Ark, alright as a time waster but Jaws was powerful as far as impact. The Scuba industry took a hit for a couple of years. There were tours to see and or fish for sharks. Years of needless slaughter of sharks and finally some scientific study of them. The theme song still can create a strong reaction.

 

just watched jaws a couple days ago, it's still a brilliant film. they just need to release it on blu-ray. you would think this year being the 35th anniverssary, it would a no-brainer.

chad

 

This is a tough one. Both JAWS and RAIDERS are movies that have dialog that's part of our vocabulary. Just the other day, my wife and I were looking at some pictures and she said, "That's some bad hat, Harry," quoting the line from JAWS in the beach scene.

And being in Florida now, I've said a few times, "Snakes! Why'd it have to be...snakes?"

But, one has to go, and I'm going to choose JAWS to exit, mainly on the strength of the John Williams score. There isn't anything more majestic than his main theme to RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK.

Harry

 

This is really hard, because both 'Jaws' and 'Raiders' can be seen to be a result of (what has been termed) the genius of the system rather than due to Spielberg exclusively. This is to take nothing away from Spielberg (Buckland's Directed by Steven Spielberg: Poetics of the Contemporary Hollywood Blockbuster provides a painstaking analysis of Spielberg's obvious formal talents), but it should place his contributions within a broader context. Where would 'Jaws' be without Verna Fields, Bill Butler, Howard Sackler/John Milius, the exceptional cast and John Williams? Where would 'Raiders' be without Lucas, Lawrence Kasdan, Douglas Slocombe, Michael Kahn and John Williams?

If anything, Spielberg is masterful because of his ability to identify those talents that will best serve his needs, and use them accordingly. Like most all directors, he has benefited professionally from the uncritical adoption of auteur theory in popular film criticism. I think 'Jaws', especially, is a triumph of the system, and not exclusively a result of Spielberg.

 

I agree.

 

Jaws.

It's got a rubber shark.

Kidding. Can't deny its impact in its time.

While I really do revere Encounters, Schindler's, Jurassic and Ryan... and insist that such films as Duel and Terminal aren't given near enough credit... and really do think Doom and Last Crusade are better...

I will say this about Raiders:

I've never been to a movie in a theatre where the audience was not just giddy, not just exhilarated, but whipped into a freak-out frenzy as they were for Raiders of the Lost Ark. Jumping up and down in their seats, screaming and laughing out loud, completely overwhelmed.

Adults, mind you.

Getting an adventure that, in the early 80s, they just couldn't get at home. Totally fresh, totally engaging, totally memorable over time.

Just the thought of this movie makes me wanna buy a Jumbo Popcorn, extra butter.

And I don't even go to the movies anymore.

Raiders for the win.

My finalists: Raiders, Jurassic. I like dinosaurs.

Projected finalists: Raiders, ET. Because TWL often favors hits-with-heart.

 

That's about right. I didn't want to see "Raiders" when my Dad dragged me and my little brother to it. I don't even remember why I didn't want to go - I think I heard "Lost Ark" and thought it'd be some tedious thing about Noah or whatever.

Boy, was I wrong. When I think of exhilerating movie experiences, I think back to 1981 and "Raiders". It was a movie that just seemed to come at you with one apparently untoppable thrill after another.

When Indy dug for the Ark, I thought that had to be it.

When Indy and Marion got on the boat, I thought that had to be it.

When Indy got on the sub, I thought that had to be it.

The movie could've wrapped up at any of those points and no one would've complained, but it just kept coming at you.

"Jaws" created the idea of the summer blockbuster, but "Raiders" created a definition of an action movie that Hollywood still follows.

And it's still the best of them all. I've seen it at least 30 times and it's still just a big, thrilling kick in the pants.

God, do I miss Spielberg circa 1975-1982 - well, minus 1979. In my book, NO filmmaker has had a better run. All four of those movies are certified classics - if THAT Spielberg didn't get pretensions in 1985 and he made more flicks like that, I'd call him the greatest filmmaker of all-time...

 

These are the two finalists I'd have. Not sure why this is thought to be a tough call, though. "Jaws" is really good, but "Raiders" is the best of its kind, so indisputably so I can't even imagine another action/adventure-style film ever coming close to it.

 

Discussion:

1) "Raiders" vs... I don't know. "ET" or "Jaws" or "CE3K" would've made me happy.

2) I actually thought we'd get "Schindler's List" vs. "Saving Private Ryan" - I thought the vote would go down the "serious movie" path. Pretty happy it didn't, though I thought both of those films stayed around far too long. No way "ET" and "CE3K" should've bitten the dust before those.

Heck, I think "Jurassic Park" and the two other Indy films should've lasted longer than "SL" and "SPR"...

 

"SL" and "SPR" are both very, very good films, but I too am glad we've managed to avoid the fairly tedious discussion of how to compare something like either of those to "Raiders" or "Jaws."

 

Very well said. Agree with all of the above.

 

Raiders.

I'm not sure which two would have been my finalists - maybe SL and Jaws? - but Raiders wouldn't have been one of them. I found nothing exciting, exhilarating or engaging about it.

 

Gotta ask: when/where did you see it?

 

When it first came out.

A movie theater somewhere in Poughkeepsie.

 

Raiders of the Lost Ark:thumbsdn:
My wife made me see it again with her and I still can't stand it.

Jaws is a classic for me.

 

Okay. I thought I could understand you disinterest in it via a bad home video screening or whatever, but since you saw it first run, I'll just have to .

Not saying I think everyone has to love "Raiders", but to not find anything exciting, engaging or exhilirating about it? Leaves me stunned...

 

I'm just as stunned that people like it, for me it was just a glorified serial that was around in the 1950's, only the '50's serials were better.

I feel the same way about Star Wars, I'm stunned that it's so popular.

 

Don't know what to tell you. Some of it may be generational - being born in 1967, I certainly was the PERFECT age demo for "Star Wars" and "Raiders".

Then again, my Dad was 47 when "Raiders" hit and he loved it as well. That and "Star Wars" both had great cross-generational - and cross-everything else - appeal. (The Old Man never thought much of the original "Star Wars", but he really liked "Empire".)

I'm too young to have experienced the serials back in their time, but I can't imagine they did it better than "Raiders". It was like the ultimate serial but with actual good actors and production values.

Hey, if you don't like it, you don't like it, but I can't figure out why the sucess of those flicks "stuns" you. I mean, they're high-quality flicks with a lot of obvious appeal - there are plenty of movies that don't work for me but whose appeal I understand...

 

BTW, I might have a better idea why those films popularity "stuns" you if I knew what flicks in the action/sci-fi genres you DID like...

 

Voting against Jaws.

Raiders is my favorite of Spielbergs movies, but I don't feel strongly about it, like I do my favorite Kubrick or favorite Scorcese movie. I like most of what Spielberg has done, but nothing really elevates to holy grail status in my mind.

 

This has to be the toughest poll I've ever faced. These are the two Spielberg films I like best, the two I thought would still be standing when the smoke cleared. Now, let me say, I rank Jaws in my top 5 favorite films of all-time. Raiders is up there, but not quite as special to me as Jaws.

But I'm not voting based on personal feelings, I'm going to think real hard and figure out which film has more weaknesses. And when I do that I find that Raiders of the Lost Ark is the better of the two films. Jaws has some clunky moments early on. Some goofy dialogue and hammy acting. So I'm voting for Raiders of the Lost Ark. Great action. Great acting. Great cast. Great effects. Great story. Nazis! Snakes! Map Room! This is my FAMILY LABEL!

 

Examples. Please.

 

Well past time to kill “Jaws.” “Raiders” is his best film.

Q; I thought and preferred that the final pair would be “Raiders” and “Schindler’s List.”

But I suggest that you ask for folks predictions for the final two in the first round.