Spielberg's Films Are SHALLOW and CHILDISH
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 22 июл 2024
- LIKE & SUBSCRIBE for new videos everyday. bit.ly/2QA8RbN
Movies have become increasingly rooted in visual spectacle and less so in substance, particularly in recent years, which is indicative of a culture in intellectual decline. Nowhere in the world of film is this more apparent than in the works of Steven Spielberg.
Watch the full episode here: bit.ly/2WScLnf
Watch full episodes of The Andrew Klavan Show here: bit.ly/3kHz06I
To listen to this episode, subscribe to The Andrew Klavan Show on Apple Podcasts: apple.co/2KM6HCG
Pre-order my new novel The Truth and Beauty, available wherever books are sold on April 5, 2022. utm.io/uelgG
Become a Daily Wire Member today to gain access to exclusive content: utm.io/ud1Bz
Like this video? For more Andrew Klavan and Daily Wire content, subscribe to this channel ruclips.net/channel/UCyhE... the bell for notifications so you never miss a story!
#AndrewKlavan #StevenSpielberg #Movies #DailyWire
It’s escapism. That’s what Spielberg is good at. Jaws, ET, Jurassic Park, all escapism. Like Klavan mentioned, they’re like “Disney” movies…for adults. Entertaining, for sure, but not necessarily so profound.
They’re not for adults 😂 They’re like Disney movies. Period. End of story.
@@elijeremiah1058 I think you're confusing chronological age for maturity. But otherwise, I agree.
@@tfpp1 i agree with you that his movies are awesome escapism. I love Steven Spielberg’s early classics like Jaws, Close Encounters, Indiana Jones all the way up to Jurassic park. I don’t mind that they’re shallow because that’s totally valid! Not every film should be deep or express the director’s views. His blockbusters are perfect. The problem is that when he makes a supposedly serious film like Schindler’s list or saving private Ryan, it always has that exact same shallow feel! He thinks those movies are more sophisticated but they’re not. Jaws is more sophisticated filmmaking than Amistad.
Modern Hollywood is the epitome of childishness. Layoff of Spielberg's filmmaking.
Modern Hollywood tells you you're a racist, sexist, and homophobic for calling them on their bullshit, because their "bastion of representativeness" movies are low quality horseshit. That's pure childishness.
So I disagree.
How many adults you know go to cinemas for ‘profound’ experience you schmuck. People have work to do, lives to lead, almost 90 per cent go to the movies for escapism and feel good movies. Spielberg has mostly delivered that and is quite possibly the best at that.
“Empire of the Sun” is Spielberg’s best WWII drama precisely because it is told from the point of view of a boy (played by then child actor Christian Bale). The sentimentalized and almost agnostic view it takes on the war fit perfectly with Spielberg’s artistic sensibilities.
It was also almost entirely adapted from the much better Book. Not a single thing in it was from the Mind of Spielberg.
@@justinlast2lastharder749 Ya' know ... a LOT of movies are made from books (that are much better)
@@justinlast2lastharder749 Yes, J.G. Ballard was a brilliant writer.
@@alancross1141 This one was partially based on the Author's Life and released only 3 years before the Spielberg Adaptation. Spielberg also didn't write it the Adaptation, he only directed.
Of all Spielberg movies, I’ve repeat watched this the most. I don’t truly understand the political dynamics, but the movie always sweeps me away. I can hear the music in my ears as I type this…..
I love when Andrew Klavan talks about culture in large.
Even when I don't always agree, I never leave without something worth considering. Love his culture talks.
I can say as a person who’s listened to the full show for years, I think you’re searching for the wrong audience with the headlines. I know those get the most clicks, but I don’t even want to click it and I already know what he’s saying!
I think Klavan has very well-thought out opinions, but these RUclips headlines make it seem like he’s the shallow and childish one trying to dish hot takes.
Well said
I agree...
I think based on the RUclips algorythm, you get more views for click bait titles
The algorithm works how it works...if this gets these we'll thought out opinions and agree or disagree but worthy of hearing opinions out their to the masses then so be it.
@@edgewiseCL Agreed. Don't hate the player, hate the game.
With respect...I think you're kinda looking at Shindler's List with the wrong perspective, and the fact that you feel the "actual" Great film on the Holocaust is a documentary underlines that, for me. Spielberg is illustrating in his film how even in the most monstrous of times, good men can make a difference, however small the difference may be.
It's how the new owners of the Star Wars franchise progress. I stopped wanting* to watch their cartoons with my kids years ago. Wife, kids, elders. "You take your kids to see what they want to see or you're a horrible father!!" 🤷♂️ W.T.E.L (what the ever living) could I have done? I was a "crazy person" for telling them why. One of my cousins went to a bad place tripping out over Toy Story 3. I've definitely seen where it can take you. I hope he's alright now. Family won't tell me.
It's because some people care way too much about "the holocaust".
What about Stalin's holocaust? Why can't we all talk about that? It's about Collectivist Totalitarianism, not religion.
I agree with you, however, klavan is right Spielberg movies aren’t that great other than visually.
@@turdferguson7504 He's a master at conveying the EMOTION of a situation. Arguably his weakness might be the intellectual side of it.
I think his strengths is that they're just really well 'made'. I'm not gonna have an epiphany or deep meaning. But his work is worth appreciating and study for the filmcraft itself. He's the gymnastics to the ballet, technical excellence without the deeper beauty - but still a worthwhile pursuit.
And while I do appreciate Christian themes here and there. But I don't need that from every movie.
One of the best films I ever saw on the theme of spirituality was The Craft. It was perhaps the only occult film that did not work on the God versus Satan binary, where the Spirit was a universal force that one could draw power from, assuming that one was responsible with it.
A.I. is one of his more profound movies in my opinion. Although granted, it heavily lends from the Pinocchio narrativ.
@@Puma5
It's basically a Kubrick movie that SS directed.
@@Plainview-tu7xn That doesn’t make it Kubrick’s film any more than Gone With the Wind is Margaret Mitchell’s film. Kubrick died in 99 and had nothing to do with the production. Don’t take away Spielberg’s accomplishments for dumb reasons.
I love the diverse takes DW shows have. Not only from varying perspectives, but also varying objectives-Ben informs on politics, economics, etc. The others connect on other levels, and Andrew highlights some really neat cultural things.
And he's a gamer
I don’t know if i agree with this. Steven Spielberg made a lot of great films, even if they are childish, anyone could understand and realize that they brought out imagination in anyone no matter what their age
Exactly he's subjectively wrong about this
Yeap E.T is so heartwarming movie that we all remember when we were kids
Speilberg is overrated. It's so bizarre. I find his movies ... lame. In the eighties and nineties it was a fairly popular opinion for people that paid attention to movies as art.
AI is his best movie because it was really Kubrick's movie.
The Foundation of Economic Education has an interesting interpretation of Jurassic Park as a story about socialism and how quickly a meticulously laid plan can go horribly wrong.
facts, this is a dumb take. Also, he is definitely shitting on Star Wars as being shallow
Almost every Spielberg movie has kids in distress. Divorce. Separation.
And why the teenager left his home, carrying the tools of a gay boy in a guitar case. Spielberg's first film Amblin'. Which is NAMBLA , North American Man Boy Assoc. changed to AMBL inc. his company. In the last scene, he
had the book The City and the Stars, by Athur C Clarke, the world where boys can live as adults... the famous
paedophile who lived in India, never arrested by the UK police. In you ever watch Hook... adults and kids playing roles together with body paints etc... is one disturbing film.
Every director has their preferred storytelling tropes that appear in most of their work. Spielberg is no exception. For example you could say every Scorsese movie is about good men going bad and how the criminal lifestyle gets worse over time.
@@jameslough6329 The problem with that is that it's limits your audience. That's why I could never get into both directors you mentioned.
@@KrisBryant99 What I’m saying is that almost every director does this. If you named me your personal favourite directors, I could probably tell you which particular storytelling tropes are common in most of their movies. BTW here’s a couple more examples.
Most of Christopher Nolan’s movies are about terrorism and or conspiracies. and most of James Cameron’s movies involve parents (most often mothers) defending their children. My point still stands, EVERY great director in Hollywood history has common tropes that they relied on throughout their career. It is part of how directors build their style as filmmakers.
@@jameslough6329 that's fine but if you're audience feels excluded then don't surprised at the why.
The point of some movies is to sit down for an hour. Get involved in the life of a fictional character and leave not feeling like we where taken for a battering on our morals. He’s actually managed to do it, and do it decently well. Personally I’m glad that movies exist that I don’t need to pay attention to fully. That’s what books are for.
A lot of Stephen Spielberg's movies are Shallow and Childish, and that is exactly what we love about them! That sense of childlike wonder in his movies are what makes them great, and he is the best at it.
he has a lot that are very adult like schindler's list, catch me if you can, the post, lincoln, munich, amistad, minority report. all great.
spielberg and king write children like small adults which they are not. Almost everything they do is idiotic, illogical and nonsensible.
@@crobeastness Yeah. You are right. He does the darker stuff great too.
They are”popcorn” movies
Used to be
I kinda disagree. I think they are from a child’s view to bring out the wonder that a child has. Jurassic park deff did that for me and many my age.
It’s a shame so many have completely missed your point. Even the best artists can have vapid philosophies.
I couldn't agree more than Spielberg has a bit of a vapid worldview. On that I completely agree with him, but that really doesn't seem like that's all he's trying to say. It's the rest of it that I don't really follow.
Spielberg’s “Lincoln” is the best movie I have ever seen on Lincoln’s life and definitely the best presidential movie I’ve seen. It’s phenomenal. Indiana Jones is a great movie trilogy. I think you’re using his politics as an excuse to discredit his work.
What do you expect? See the show he is on.
He has good criticism but its veiled thinly by his verbose hints of politics.
@@unknowninfinium4353 Well to be fair he’s attacking the culture which is a “first principle” of politics.
Indiana Jones is antiwhitism.
Spielberg is far from my favorite director, but I think Andrew’s criticisms are vastly overblown. I think Spielberg’s greatest strength was instilling a childlike wonder in his audience. He was also capable of going deep. If you look at the Indiana Jones films, the religious themes are quite poignant and thought provoking. Yes, blockbuster films will always be shallow in certain ways, but Spielberg, at least in the 70s through the 90s, made the best of what the blockbuster film had to offer.
Indiana Jones was from the mind of George Lucas, not Spielberg. It's just another Spielberg adaptation of someone else's work.
@@justinlast2lastharder749 Lucas came up with the idea, but Spielberg fleshed it out.
So Spielberg isn’t a child, but a deep thinking philosopher who confronts the deepest darkest parts of the human experience?
@@Dude0000 Spielberg has some movies that are innocent and childlike in nature (such as E.T. or Jurassic Park) but he was also very good at making dark and dramatic movies that provide an in depth look at the human experience (examples include Schindler’s List, Jaws, and Empire of the Sun).
@@justinlast2lastharder749 LOL, are you really trying to give Lucas more credit for Indy? LOL come on man.
Wow. I have never disagreed with a fellow Christian conservative so vehemently about so many things. Lol
Everytime I watch the mashed potato scene from the movie " Close Encounters " , I can't help , but say to myself " that's it Marge , I'm going to clown college" !
You failed to mention his best film, Empire of the Sun. A great film that portrays a nuanced view of war from the eyes of a child/teen. Powerful.
That movie was boring & instantly forgettable. Maybe Spielberg could try doing a film which shows war from the side of the war profiteers. Without of which, there would be no war.
That's because of the source material by J.G Ballard
It was boring
I have always thought that Spielberg had trouble telling an adult story. Klavan's perspective on why is very interesting.
What's an adult story? and are they always better?
So he complains about the lack of atrocity and abundance of depth depicted in Schindler's List yet whines about the lack of depth and abundance of atrocity in Saving Private Ryan? Very conflicted perspective for an "industry insider".
What are you talking about, he didn’t say that at all about either film. He called them both childish and simplistic, criticizing their depth.
If all you got from this is “needs more atrocity; needs less atrocity” you weren’t tracking with anything he said.
@@easternmcg okay Chris 👍
@@Nero-ox5tw It’s on you if you want to leave an underdeveloped, snarky, twitter-tier take to mislead people who haven’t even watched the video. Thanks for the laughs bud.
@@Nero-ox5tw He's not wrong.
@@drzerogi Yeah he is
"Schindler's List" was a very good movie. It was a well-told story of one small segment of that war. It didn't try to represent the entire war or even the entire German reaction to the Jews.
But Klavan's right in the fact that Schindler's List, a film that couldn't truthfully depict the evil of the Holocaust, became THE Holocaust movie. There's not going to be another one because it's already been done, acting as the definitive depiction.
Yes, this one was an exception.
I'll be honest, I've never seen it. Is it actually good?
Schindler's List is the only movie I have seen when after the movie's conclusion the entire crowd of over 150 people did not make one sound and exited the theatre. Not one sound!
@@KyleKringle Sophie's Choice? Boy in the Striped Pyjamas? The Pianist? All great movies.
Agree to disagree. Raiders of the Lost Ark is one of favorite movies. It's fun and entertaining. Not everything has to be deep and philosophical. It's OK for a movie to just be entertaining. John Williams soundtracks certainly help Spielbergs films become hits as well.
Wow. Never thought I'd disagree with Andrew. First time for everything.
Klavan is pretty much always wrong about cinema. Ever hear his movie picks. They're awful.
He got a lot wrong in ET (using TWO fingers, Touching Eliot’s forehead instead of heart etc) makes it seem like he saw the movie once. Also I’m pretty sure the slow knife stab in Saving Private Ryan is NOT meant to be rape.
@@Geronimo_Jehoshaphat I agree, Andrew doesn't see it but he gets a little too smug and hipster.
@@RobotacularRoBob
I suspect Klavan has some latent insecurities which have manifests in posterity because he projected them onto persons rather than purge them from his person. That's my theory.
It's nice to see someone saying how lame speilberg is. I know "I'm wrong" because everyone disagrees with me. They seem like movies for 10 year olds.
Andrew Klavan:
Spielberg's films are shallow & childish.
Me, (hauling out a HUGE library of pre-1997 Hong Kong movies catering towards traditional Chinese, 'patriotic' values):
Hold my beer...
Hong Kong 97 is the best Jackie Chan video game adaptation of all time
I love those movies. I've also got a massive collection, it's a pity you can stream them anynore cus it's all on DVD or VCD. You can stream some of the more popular ones like infernal affairs or some stephen chow or Jackie Chan ones, but I can't find a streaming service with lots of HK movies. Let me know if you know of any. I've got Iquiyi.
I remember being just out of school when Raiders of the Lost Ark came out and I felt like the movies became FUN AGAIN!
Spielberg is a great director and Lost Ark is a great action movie and is fun but it is not a truly great movie.
It would be fantastic if we had movies like that today and on top of that we got great artistic movies.
New Hollywood was a more simplistic endeavor that gave us more excitement orientated movies.
@@bighands69 Raider's is a truly brilliant movie.
@@Mr.Goodkat
It was great but was not a patch on Ben Her.
Just a dumb critique.
Spielberg takes dramatic situations and tells a human story within them. Shoa is for a completely different audience.
The opening sequence of Ryan was intended to convey the human toll of D Day, after that it was a human story brilliantly told.
Clearly Mr Klavan has an agenda about modern cinema, and given that Hollywood is mostly superheroes these days, Spielberg movies are several rungs higher in audience requirements. But if he made Mean Streets Klavan would probably be complaining about the bad language and violence.
I'm a Conservative, but I don't think his agenda is correct.
Mr Klavan has an agenda alright. He grew up in an era were Hitchcock, David Lean and John Ford were the gold standard of directing. Spielberg was a good director but not in the same league as the greats.
Mr Klavan has an agenda alright and that agenda of quality. Classic era Hollywood had amazing scripts that were on a par with the best novels and that is not the case since New Hollywood came along.
Anyone remember what Kappy had to say about Steven Spielberg 🤔
I don't think Schinders List was childish.
I like Klavan, but his view here is ridiculously simplistic and spectacularly wrong.
This might be off the topic, but I am a huge fan of Mel Gibson as a director. When you look at every movie he has directed since Braveheart, like the Passion, Apocalypto and Hacksaw Ridge, they are some of the most unflinchingly engrossing pieces of filmmaking ever made. He follows the classic Heroes journey from Joseph Campbell. Although his films have their fare share of brutality and violence, the characters always follow a path to redemption and sacrifice. Anyways, if Mel Gibson is not a perfect person but as an artist I believe he could have surpassed someone like Spielberg in terms of filmmaking.
Klavan has the exact same criticism of Schindler's List that Stanley Kubrick did. Interesting. I wonder if he knows that.
He probably adopted it from Kubrick.
@@wordragon That did cross my mind.
@@jayjayjigsbys
Or he came up with it him self.
@@bighands69 That crossed my mind, too, haha. It doesn't really matter. It's a pretty well thought out criticism of the movie.
Not all art, including film, necessarily needs to be intellectually deep or profound in order to be valuable. Take, for example, the Jeeves and Wooster novels by P.G. Wodehouse, Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll, or Three Men in a Boat by Jerome K. Jerome. These are either intellectually superficial, frivolous, or absurd works of art. However, they're valuable in the sense of a breezy and almost musical literary style as well as bringing amusement and humor, which in turn provide cognitive rest for minds wearied from the burdens of life. Similarly, Indiana Jones is intellectually superficial, but it lets us escape away from the mundane or somber and into high adventure, which, again, in turn allows us to rest and recover so that we can begin the struggle of life anew, reinvigorated and strengthened for the next day's tasks. We often need rest as much as we need reflection. Isn't that the primary purpose of the Sabbath, to take a religious example that might resonate with Andrew Klavan? In any case, art that may be intellectually superficial but that provides rest for people has value in life too. At least for those who find rest in such art! But perhaps Andrew Klavan is someone who finds rest only in the perpetual plumbing of profundities. If so, I won't begrudge him his choice, so long as he doesn't begrudge me mine when I watch Raiders of the Lost Ark once again! 😊
I have to disagree with you on a few points Mr. Klavan.
(1) words. A great film director can show a lot of emotion with a single shot and no dialogue at all (2001 A Space Odyssey). Also, in the old movies, people talk much more eloquently then even the smartest people ever could in real life, making them unrelatable. Sometimes the brilliance of dialogue comes from how accurate it is to real life.
(2) childishness isn't always bad: even in a complicated world, there is still right and wrong. Having people like Oskar Schindler and CPT Miller go through the heart of darkness, the whole time being relatable and grounded humans, allows them to be role models and inspirations about what to do when surrounded by human evil. It's meant for a different audience than yourself, specifically people who are being exposed to human evil for the first time and have no idea how to react.
If you have too much darkness people come away thinking nihilism is the right course of action (Rick and Morty, Game of Thrones).
(3) personal preference: while Casablanca will always be the greatest movie ever made, that is not to say that movies that came later are automatically bad. Schindler's List, Saving Private Ryan, these always seemed like incredibly mature films to me, nothing childish about them. In fact, they helped me grow up.
(4) my final thoughts: you seem to prefer films that promote high-minded ideals like chivalry, marriage, intelligence, courage in the face of danger, etc, out of fear that we are losing touch with those necessary virtues. While I agree to a point, I also believe that art should also challenge those beliefs, lest they be taken too far.
Also, even today you can find good examples of the art you're looking for. The Dark Knight, The Lord of the Rings, The Empire Strikes Back, Spiderman No Way Home, these are all visual films that go through darkness, yet promote the very values we are needing.
Lastly, I don't blame artists for doing things that make money. It's all part of the game.
All that being said, still great work, and you have a lot of courage for challenging the king himself.
You mentioned No way Home edit that fast
I like Batman Begins over The Dark Knight; Return of the Jedi over The Empire Strikes Back; and Spider-Man 2 and Into the Spider-Verse over all the other Spider-Man movies but otherwise, you are correct.
No Way Home sucked
Well said
You mistake childishness with childlike. Childishness has a negative connotation, meaning an adult who won't grow up. Childlike has a more positive connotation. And your sentences after "childishness isn't always bad" make no sense. It does not argue the point.
I think the only problem with spielberg films is that they usually have a happy ending.The greatest thing about spielberg is that he easily cuts across genre and he knows how to entertain.Spielberg makes modern fairytales.
The objection to “Schindler’s List” seems more based on how it was marketed. It’s much more complex than Klavan let’s on.
Agreed.
@Cranky Yokel A 3 hour drama is not comparable to a 9 hour documentary. They work on different rules.
@Cranky Yokel The aesthetic rules are different. SL is telling one specific story.
@@Tolstoy111 But he's right about SL being a bad movie. It was manipulative and his characterization of Schindler was phony. Watch The Pianist if you want to see an authentic dramatization of those events. That is a great dramatization of that grave time.
@@LisaMurphy SL was a wonderful film. Haunting and lyrical. Literate to boot. Didn’t like The Pianist at all. Now that was shallow and manipulative. And hollow. What was authentic about it? The title character was a passive cipher, the Nazis were barking cliches, the ghetto residents all talk like they just walked out of a seminar (“they have already exterminated 3 million of us””).
I remember thinking, when Spielberg directed A.I. Artificial Intelligence, which was a project that Stanley Kubrick originated, and Spielberg eventually took over after Kubrick's death, that I just couldn't see _Spielberg_ of all people picking up where Kubrick left off. He seemed like a lightweight compared to Spielberg. I never articulated the reason behind that as well as Klavan does here though. I love many of Spielberg's films: Jaws, the Indiana Jones trilogy (the less said about the 4th film the better), Jurassic Park, Lincoln, and yes, Saving Private Ryan and Schindler's List (though I certainly understand Klavan's criticisms of those films). But Kubrick is rightly seen as one of the great titans of cinema, and his films are intelligent and thought provoking and often philosophical in a way that Spielberg has never even come close to achieving in his career.
Sandwiching Schindler's List between two dinosaur movies showed zero growth as an artist. Spielberg's trajectory should have been altered forever. The subject matter deserved a decade on either side of it, like Kubrick would have done with The Aryan Papers.
Yeah I’m gonna disagree.
Go jaxoff to the adult movies his daughter makes then.
@@ClinicalDecisionYikesYT that’s pretty sus
I listened to it all and I have to conclude it's an April Fool's joke, it was uploaded April 1st and I have seen actual jokes which made more sense.
Not at all. He makes entertaining films but they are not great films like the classics.
@@bighands69 They are vastly superior to almost all of the classics and maybe even all of them, Spielberg's films are the classics.
Your point about how movies used to be more talky and not as visual as Spielberg’s stuff shows you don’t seem to understand what cinema is, despite having worked in the industry. A movie isn’t supposed to be a filmed play, which seems to be what you want. A movie tells a story visually.
He is talking about how the industry has become obsessed with visual rather than story. And in that obsession has created a new industry that is one dimensional and a beast that devours.
@@bighands69 well that’s gay 😂
@@bighands69 I love how the writer of One Missed Call is bashing the director of Jaws
Great segment. More film analysis please!
Very childish clickbait title
Very chidish comment, I can see the tears.
@@dennisshaper4744 Your comment is childish also. I very "I know you are but what am I" feel to it.
I watch films as an escape from reality, I like popcorn movies that entertain & excite me, I don't like drama films that induce negative emotions, if I want gritty reality I can turn off my TV.
You may like that but there is a problem when the whole of industry is based on nothing but excitement.
What you end up with is Fast and Furious 9 and Transformers 7. And we are currently on Marvel 23.
A balance between good art and good entertainment in terms of choice is what some of us want.
I want to watch Gone with the Wind and at the same time watch Minority report. When the industry is based purely on thrills what you get is neither.
@@bighands69 I don't look to motion pictures for introspection or to learn something, books, paintings and classical music exist to fill that need.
@@bighands69 the film industry exists to make money, it is a consumer product far more than it is art.
@@bighands69 Surely Spielberg's Blockbuster's of the 1970s, 80s and 90s are a lot more compelling than Transformers or Fast and Furious? I know he's attributted to creating the summer blockbuster , however there are an abundance of well made blockbisters made in the later part of the 20th century that have better stories and characters than the trash they have been putting out the last 20 years. A lot of these comments just come across as snobbery when most people just want to be entertained. I agree that cinema has changed for the worse, but I think that special effects and marvel has a lot to do with it. Hollywood is creatively bankrupt and now we have all the wokeness being injected into it. The 1970s was a golden age of Hollywood and Spielberg had a lot to do with that. If anything Star Wars had more to do with shallow Blockbuster's than Jaws or Close Encounters.
@@rattelv426
My point was that the industry as a whole needs a mixture of different films rather than just fast and furious type movies.
So back in the 1990s we would have seen films like Usual suspects that cost $5 million and films like Jurassic park. Two completely different scales and two completely different films. Both were successful in their own right.
Could you imagine going to see a film like LA Confidential today in the cinema.
Spielberg is “childish” but Alice in Wonderland is one of the greatest films ever made? Spielberg isn’t a top tier director but he makes well plotted movies that appeal to the masses which is a role that should be filled in any medium because average joes are never going to appreciate “high art”. He’s certainly better than the Marvel garbage that has taken the place of his summer blockbusters.
Like how could anything be worse than Loki or WandaVision? Especially compared to stuff like Hook or Indiana Jones?
“But at least it’s not as bad as (insert random garbage here)” isn’t a sufficient argument. Lowlives like Spielberg already make too much money. They should at least create something of value. I don’t understand why so many of you have this impulse to defend mediocrity.
@@allisonanne571 Easily accessible entertainment will always be "mediocre" compared to more profound expressions because by their nature they are inaccessible. Tell a high school dropout to watch 2001 and they will see no value in it because they simply don't have the capacity to understand it. The themes in Spielberg movies are not complex but they are no less valuable because they reach the audience that needs and can understand them.
@@allisonanne571 Compare this to a marvel movie, where the most complex and interesting character in the entire franchise is a purple dude who is a retarded Utilitarian whose entire plan is undermined with plot holes. It's perfectly valid to miss Spielberg's primacy.
As a rare conservative who actually has worked in Hollywood, Andrew brings a useful perspective to the table. So, I appreciate his perspective. I don't care for Spielberg's politics, obviously -- his slavish devotion to and funding of the Democrat Party is myopic, misguided and unfortunate, as with all Hollywood Leftists who reflexively follow the lemming herd. That said, the guy has undeniably made some entertaining and powerful movies. I saw "Empire of the Sun" once in the theater, as a kid, and, it's stayed with me, all these years. "Saving Private Ryan" and "Schindler's List" are also moving and powerful. Andrew's criticism is interesting, though. I see where he's coming from.
Spielberg was once brilliant
Still is. His West Side Story was amazing filmmaking.
Not a popular opinion but one that should be given a chance at the very least. We have very little diversity of thought when it comes to this nuanced subject.
If something is Beautiful it is not shallow
Steven Spielberg's films have made almost 15 Billion dollars during his career. Me thinks he is doing something right.
For the audience, yes. Michelangelo created art that transcended his time. Spielberg's movies are coloured in a way that is quite distinct from reality.
@@erastusamaechi9977 I would argue he is not trying for art, rather profit. While I can see why a purist might be upset about this, but I bet that there are Spielberg fics out there were more people have seen them and didn't like them, than have seen some artistically correct films.
More to the point, while I can't speak for another living soul, I go to movies to escape reality.
@@erastusamaechi9977 no movie is reality 😂
We get it, you don't undersrand cinema. I could tell.
How can you say so much without saying anything at all?
No, his films were once great. It’s easy to look back at classic films and say, “I could’ve done it better“ in hindsight, but that’s reminiscent of the BS “reimagine“ culture we find ourselves in.
Instead, it’s more interesting to see how his films went from original and fun to formulaic and unfeeling.
Your bullied child analogy is so perfect. This perspective also harmed me as a young person because it made me view the world that way.
How can you watch Schindler’s List and say it doesnt portray any evil. Schindler's List is Disney-esque? Also the Saving Private Ryan "German raping a jew with a knife" scene has the be the weirdest take on that scene Ive ever heard in my life.
You telling me you weren’t aroused when that knife was being pushed into that guy’s chest?
I feel like this more about not liking Spielberg's politics, he's a great director, talented writer and producer. The guy has done just about every genre and has given us so many classics starting with Jaws back in the mid 70's. I consider Band of Brothers the greatest take on the war genre.
I think it would be fairer to say Spielberg doesn't understand war or human violence so the films he makes regarding those come off as shallow. When jumping into sci-fi, his films are much more insightful. I'm thinking specifically of Jaws, Encounters of the Third Kind and Jurassic Park. When I rewatched Jurassic Park I was genuinely surprised at the sheer mastery of story-telling and thematic coherence exhibited throughout the film. I remembered it merely as a good popcorn film, but every scene is infused with the themes of control and chaos such that even Shakespeare would be in awe at.
I think art should be measured by its ability to express truth, no matter how simple or obtuse. 200 pages of script doesn't automatically make a film more insightful than if it had 100 pages of script. What matters is execution. A picture is worth a 1000 words after all. There is alot of nuance in visual arts and potential for profound insights and imagery. Eg- In Star Wars Phantom Menace(shock!), the main hero is dangling above an abyss while the devlisih antagonist who slayed his mentor taunts him from above. Just prior, he lost his apprentice' weapon. In order to overcome evil, he must literally rise above it and take hold of his mentor's weapon to kill his foe who cannot understand where his resilience/hope comes from. A deep story is told without the use of any words. I believe Spielberg and Lucas are masters of visual arts and there are so many visual metaphors cleverly used in their films. This doesn't make people dumber, it makes them smarter!
Have not paid to see a movie in 25 years.
Klavan should make a video reimagining Spielberg’s movies with actual depth
Nothing makes money that isn’t mindless escapism, and while I don’t mind happy endings it’s not good when people just expect everything to be neatly wrapped up at the end. It’s rare for a conservative to point this out.
There are plenty of films that are not mindless escapism that have made hundreds of millions of dollars at the box office.
They left out the best twist in "Jaws". Hooper had a affair with Brodys wife, Brody finds out, (but does nothing) and later the shark gets Hooper and Brody swims back to the island a sole survivor and it's left a mystery to Brodys wife (and the town) as to: Did Brody or the shark kill Hooper?
The director doesn’t direct action scenes??? What are you talking about? The director should direct the entire film, and if it’s an action film-like many Spielberg movies are-the director should definitely be directing the action!
Schindler's list, Color purple, Emperor of the Sun, Always, Amistad, Lincoln, Bridge of Spies and The Post are not action films nor are they family films.
They are his serious films and those are what he will get judged upon. His entertainment films are good but they are not great films by any account.
His more serious films do not in anyway come close to the works of the great directors.
@@bighands69 Those are historical dramas, which are entertainment and in no competition with the works of Kurosawa or Goddard. His historical dramas should simply be compared to other Oscar bait like 12 Years a Slave or Monuments Men. In that light Spielberg’s are superior. But in my opinion his “serious” movies are not what’s interesting. His real contribution to cinema are the blockbusters you dismiss. Jaws, Close Encounters, Raiders, and E.T. are all sublime, some of the most perfectly realized, conceived, and executed films ever made. Spielberg’s contribution is that great cinema can be unserious and lighter than air.
Jurassic park is an excellent film.
You are spot on… And thank you for not calling them dark ages… Which is referring to the time immediately after the collapse of the Roman Empire. Its is the MIDDLE AGES, as you said. Great job… also yeah that’s why Stainglass was so important in medieval times because peasants and serfs couldn’t read only nobles, kings, usually knights and all clergyman and monks.
Actually if peasants couldn't read , they wouldn't be able to pick the legal papers they intended to destroy during the peasant revolt!
I'll call them the Dark Ages still. Archaeology finds a marked decline in quality of life. Rome even still survived in some form, but it was hardly the age of the 5 Good Emperors.
The Middle Ages, by and large, were not dark ages at all.
@@str.77 For Europe it was dark.
@@Pangora2 Nope. There was sone setback in the beginning and the end but to call a whole millennium "dark" is jut silly. It was a time of tremendous innovation, energy, beauty and intellectual achievements.
And the "good five Emperors" weren't actually that good. Of the longer reigning ones, only Hadrian and Antoninus and the former had pretty dark periods as well. Maybe you should read less of that ape from the 18th century and more actual historians.
Outside of Europe went much worse, with no recovery to this day.
I just watch movies for fun. I had a rough childhood and films were a way for me to escape for a while and imagine being somewhere else
Even as an adult and almost forty I just want to escape every once in a while. My all time favorite movie is predator with the lethal weapons right behind. I'd like to see what Andrew has to say about those films lol
That’s good insight! I’ve always said that the older movies actually double the dialogue. You actually have to thoroughly pay attention to the dialog from the beginning to the end. Not really necessary in today’s flicks. Also I believe that the actors back then really had to act because the visual effects were not so involved and CG like today. CG really has dumbed down films!
Some film historians have said that movies in the 1930s had so much talking (too much talking, according to some) because people were sick of silent movies and never wanted to see an actor pantomime ever again, for fear he'd make exaggerated, embarrassing gestures. The problem with this, of course, is that an actor talking can be almost as absurd as an actor doing mime. People who love talky scripts - and I'm one of them, I admit - often forget that sometimes an image of something can be much more subtly effective than someone describing it. And when an actor NEVER stops talking, as in many of those '30s films, he inevitably says a lot of things that didn't need to be said. A major pet peeve of film critics is dialogue in which characters explain things to each other they already know, simply because they have to tell the audience.
@@SeasideDetective2
People talk in real life they do not sit around staring at a wall or flowers. Or ignore real things that are happening in and around them.
@@SeasideDetective2 couldn't agree more with everything you said. I like a lot of "wordy" films, but sometimes less is more. "Show don't tell" is a rule of thumb in visual storytelling for a reason. That's no excuse for poor dialog like a lot of more modern films, but sometimes you can more effectively communicate something with the right visual than you can with an indulgent amount of exposition explaining something verbally.
@@bighands69 1. It isn't that dialog isn't important, but if you're directing a movie, take advantage of the fact you're dealing in a visual medium. Sometimes you can say more with a visual than with exposition.
2. I love quality dialog in a film (I saw bits of The Ten Commandments over the weekend and remarked multiple times how good the writing was), but if you don't think filler exposition exists, then I implore you to pay more attention and look for it the next couple times you decide to watch a movie. Often times things are verbally explained that really don't need it, and it comes off as though the intelligence of the audience is being insulted rather than respected as if we are incapable of figuring some things out for ourselves. Over-explaining things with unnecessary dialog is absolutely a thing, and a perfect, recent example of this is the M. Night Shyamalan film Old. Like I said, quality dialog is absolutely important, and it does seem like less and less of it exists in many modern films, but some things just don't need to be said out loud. That's just as true in real-life. People underestimate how much we communicate through nonverbal body language and how important it actually is to understanding context and someone's mood, for example.
Andrew Klavan had me laughing so hard when he said he wouldn't cry cause he's not a wuss lol you imagined Plato talking to someone and then saying I wouldn't cry because of that because I'm not a wuss lol in his robes looking all Regal
I cannot understand crying watching movies either. Not even my wife or daughter will cry watching movies.
Jaws: 5/5
Close Encounters Of The Third: 5/5
Indiana Jones Trilogy: 5/5
E.T.: 4.5/5
Poltergeist: 5/5
Twilight Zone: 4/5
The Color Purple: 4/5
Empire Of The Sun: 5/5
Hook: 4/5
Jurassic Park: 5/5
Schindler's List: 5/5
The Lost World: 2/5
Saving Private Ryan: 5/5
Catch Me If You Can: 5/5
War Of The Worlds: Dogshit
Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull: Dogshit
The Adventures Of Tintin: 3/5
War Horse: 3/5
Lincoln: 3.5/5
Ready Player One: 2/5
West Side Story: 2/5
Spielberg lost his touch 20 years ago
I noticed that about ET and Close encounters of the third kind... NOT adult stories written for adults. Very sentimental.
I would agree with everything you said here. He is great at visuals and being a visionary. But a lot of them do feel shallow.
One of the very few occasions where I somewhat disagree with Mr Klavan. I definitely do understand the perspective and the approach, however, I have to say that it is that exact child like wonder that Spielberg captures in his films, especially in ET and Jurassic Park, which have inspired generations.
Well he is my favorite 2nd unit director. Pairs well with John Williams. He is good at capturing nostalgia.
I never get tired of watching Raiders of the Lost Ark.
This is a fantastic analysis. I'm a millennial so Spielberg's films have always been around. I agree West Side Story wasn't woke. It was well made.
Same boat. He's very hit or miss with me, and I probably love less than half of his output, but the movies I do love are some of my favorites, particularly the original Indiana Jones movies and Jurassic Park.
Thank you. These are the master classes I wanted in college. It is a gift for me as an artist, musician and follower of Christ.
he created timeless films that are more entertaining than modern films...that millions still watch every single day 30 to 40 years later...hardly overrated
Overrated when compared to the likes of David Lean or John Ford. He is a very talented director who has made great family films but not at the level of greatness of other directors.
Most of Spielberg's work is hardly "timeless", and to a great extent, the movies you say are modern are merely a continuation of Spielberg's shallow juvenile depth. The few that I rewatch have the most character interaction. Saving Private Ryan turns to crap the minute the Private Ryan storyline takes over for instance...the opening scene is incredible and people focus on that part.
Damn…Klavan has offended his fans in this segment. I love listening to this English Lit guy talk about stories and cinematography. I agree, I disagree and I can listen to this forever. My only complaint is that I’m not across the table from him, asking questions, laughing and offering an occasional lay person’s observation. Brilliant, passionate and best of all, interesting.
I always wondered what the script for "Bringing up Baby" would look like. They do a lot of talking at the same time and just at the right moment one of the phrases pops out. The speed at which they talk must have made for a very long script too.
Katharine Hepburn is dizzy in that!
You should check out His Girl Friday.
Of all the young Mavericks that came out of late ‘60s new wave, in my opinion only Scorsese has maintained his artistic chops, and yet can still appeal to a modern audience.
The New Hollywood was not as good as the classic Hollywood directors who really were over the hill at that stage.
There was a sort of gap in the 1960s where the old directors were hanging up their gloves and the new directors burst onto the scene.
Hitchcock was a revolutionary director and Brian De Palma copied him.
I never minded movies being shallow or childish. Not everything has to be fine art. Movies CAN be deep and meaningful, and depending on the movie, it's nice when they are. Sometimes they can just be a fun thing to do for a couple of hours.
Sometimes paint goes on a canvass mounted to the wall, sometimes it goes on the other type of canvass made into a bouncy house.
Thanks for calling out Saving Private Ryan. That first scene is great, while the rest is just what you would expect a war movie made by Spielberg to be like.
Never thought of it that way. Thank you for the insight!
The words
Directed by Steven Spielberg
used to be enough to get me in the theater.
But that was long time ago now
Whenever I see this scene of War of the Worlds my brain immediately plays the Scary Movie version instead.
Mr. Klavan , you are just way too intelligent for the culture in which you live... And you are very brave to talk like this. Brilliant and very logical.
I really started disliking Spielberg's films when I saw Hook. It's funny, but that film shows that the heart of his film-making is emotional manipulation. I hated that film because of how poorly it was made. It always causes me to cry ( I know, I'm a wimp) at certain points even when I don't want to. It's a lot about loss of fathers. I feel manipulated and disgusted after any viewing of that film.
Hook is a very simplistic kids movie. It is not meant to be for adults.
@@bighands69 A good kids' movie does not need to be poorly made. There's no excuse for shoddy workmanship. One could argue that ET is a kids' movie. That was a much better crafted film. I like ET, and I l like some of Spielberg's movies (I really loved Jaws). I can't watch a lot of his films now, though. The point of my post was that this film's "cracks" showed the manipulation in his technique. Watch Hook and then other movies of his and you'll start to see the manipulation.
For the most part , I agree. Jaws was his best & almost everything else was pure popcorn.
This is what happens when you give your Grandad a bong.
There’s a reason that Stanley Kubrick gave A.I: artificial intelligence to Spielberg.. He knew he did sentimental films better than anyone else. Sentimental doesn’t mean childish. A lot of Spielberg‘s movies are very sentimental, but that’s what makes them wonderful to watch.
I think AI is the best Speilberg movie. Speilberg's great ability is working with kids. That's why he was good for the movie. I find Speilberg is maybe in my top 200 directors maybe. He's so overrated
@@nuckygulliver9607 your self importance is over rated
It’s one thing to make a sentimental movie or two over a career, but if that’s the only kind of story you know how to tell, it reveals a concerning want of creativity and innovation in a highly creative and innovative field.
Is Jurassic Park is about a man who doesn't like children until he sleeps with two in a tree?
Spielberg was purely an entertainment director up until The Color Purple in which he shifted into meaningful social drama, followed by Empire of the Sun, but even that was told from the point of view of a child. One of the problems I've had with his seemingly serious films, Close Encounters and A.I., is his obsession with Pinochio, and the need to inject that into his narratives. It worked well in A.I. but was somewhat ruined by the knowledge that it is his personal obsession. Still, he is a masterful visual storyteller.
I would argue that Speilberg is a technician, not an artist.
But if he were a good technician would he have chopped up the dance sequences in WSS to their ruin? He is a has-been who still holds power in Hollywood because he's loaded and connected.
@@LisaMurphy to clarify, I didn't mean to imply he was a good technician. I think his films are facile and his techniques are affectatious.
I can only partially agree here, mostly because of “the Color Purple”. That movie is so unlike any other Spielberg movie that I forget he directed it and I think many people forget as well.
I recall reading a very snarky review of The Color Purple, accusing Spielberg of making a movie about aliens called "Colored People."
HERESY!!! (The video title, anyway --seriously, Drew, clickbait much? "Shallow"?)
It's always fun to listen to someone like Klaven trying to analyze the film industry of America and not only get things wrong but focus on things that aren't important. When ET leaves Elliot he says "Be good" and the fact that it's a Jesus story doesn't really matter. He says Schindler's List is not a good American made Holocaust story but gives as an alternative the film "Shoah" which is a documentary and not American. And what of Jurrasic Park? Lincoln? Munich? Catch me if you can? The Color Purple" Is this called talking through your ass just to make a point?
I think it's a crucial part of DW's success that Klavan and Shapiro bring so much entertainment industry knowledge
They are both from the industry.
I love, and respect your perspectives so much Andrew 🙏🔥 you're a wise old geezer.
I hope everyone who enjoys Mr. Klavan's unique insights are sharing, and liking his videos. God Bless the US.
Here, I beg to differ. Visual art forms have their language - which happens to be a visual sign language. By turning movies into recorded theatre plays, the art form becomes bastardized. The predicament of movies is that they need ever-changing apparatus to be perceived. That doesn’t mean that literature isn’t a higher art form than movies - because it is. I will always choose Dostoyevsky over Spielberg. But I will also prefer Spielberg to Jean-Luc Godard.
I used to be a huge Spielberg fan. It was because of him that I went on to study film-making. But I’ve reached a stage where I had to ‘grow up’ and now I’m past that stage. He still made some terrific films, of course.
While I agree that Steven Spielberg films may be simple, there is absolutely nothing wrong with entertainment. And I think his films are very important, because without them, not a lot of people would be interested in filmmaking (like yourself). I believe that the most important stories are the ones that are for kids and young adults (not the genre, just the age group) because they are ultimately for everyone. The stories that we come across during our development are the most important stories because they shape us and build our foundations much more easily than stories that we come across as adults, and Steven Spielberg was able to achieve that. I believe that the greatest of stories are those that are easily accessible and easily communicated.
We should not hate things that are simple, only those that are cheap, and Spielberg is not cheap.
On this one, you sooooo WRONG, its actually like satire!
Speilberg is overrated. He works well with kids. That's his great ability. I just don't care about speilberg movies. I know they're good but they're also bogus and childish. I like childish but there's something lame about Speilberg movies most of the time.
It's nice to see someone out there agreeing
actually Duel was great... and AI
@@nuckygulliver9607 overrated? Haha ok dude, but hey, each its own right?
Klavan’s view that everything is sex and death doesn’t really leave room for the whimsical, does it?
This was definitely an interesting watch. Never have been good at writing long comments so I just want to say this briefly. This had many new ideas and perspectives I have not thought of before. I am glad I heard them.
We tend to centralize things. I watched a documentary about Clive Davis and realized so much of my life theme music growing up was from people signed on from one business dude in a high rise. It’s not that he didn’t have vision and good instinct, it’s that reputation and talent can snow ball into powerful influence. Other great art, or art that hits the mark better, is there too, but just appreciated by less people.