Are we old geezers like Spielberg ?

[Willy]

Interview with Steven Spielberg in magazine.
Strange, but I don't know what to do at the moment. The day after tomorrow I'm going to Guernsey and I don't want to switch on my casablanca anymore. Sometimes it's good to leave your rough film for a few weeks or even months. As soon as I have switched on my casablanca again I cannot stop anymore. Then I would even sit in front of my editing machine day and night. The remaining time is good to watch the "Tour de France" or to read some magazines. This morning I read an interesting interview with Steven Spielberg. Interesting enough for this forum.

1967
It's one of the interviews in a magazine with people of the 1967 generation. Steven Spielberg was born in 1946. Dave and I were also born in that year. We are baby-boomers, aren't we ? I still remember the many uprisings of students and other young people in Paris, Brussels, etc... Me too, I was one of the many protestors in the City of Antwerp against the dangers of nuclear weapons in Europe and against the political establishment.

Blockbusters
In this arrticle the interviewer Peter Travers (probably he's British or American) asked Steven Spielberg if he and George Lucas are not the inventors of blockbusters - "Star Wars" and "Jaws" are good examples - and if they are not responsible of everything that goes wrong with American cinema. By that he meant : merchandising and making the American people simple-minded. These are Peter Travers' words ! Very provocative, isn't it ?

Entertaining and protesting
Spielberg responded with a laugh. "George and I have just made two films to entertain the audience", he said. "Also 'Gone with the Wind' was a blockbuster in 1937. The interviewer referred to an article written by a Pauline Kael, a welknown film critic who dared to claim that Steven Spielberg is responsible for more 'escapism' in American culture. "I just wanted to make entertaining films", Steven Spielberg replied. "But my more recent films are different". Spielberg said that he made 'Schindler's List' for the survivors of the Holocaust, 'Saving Private Ryan' in order to honour the war veterans like his father and 'Munich' to protest against the fight of the USA against terrorism.

Narcissism
In this ariticle Steven Spielberg also says that he started making 8mm-films to scare the living daylights out of his three younger sisters. At school he was ragged by his schoolmates because he was a Jew, but afterwards these bogeymen were eager to play a role in his first films.

Spielberg is now worried about growing narcissism in our modern society. The generation of today is very egocentric. Young people do not accept everything anymore. They can make their own websites including all their hobbies. They know more than the generation of the "golden sixties". Reality-TV is the new tendency ! We must be the stars ! We are brassed off with sitting in front of our TV-sets ! Television must be about us ! That's what the MySpace and iPod-generation think.

Films made for cinemas
"All my films have been made for cinemas", Steven Spielberg emphasized, "because I believe in social experience !" According to Spielberg people enjoy themselves much better when they are together with other people. To Spielberg filmmaking is still a medium of art, but on the other hand he is also the boss of a firm called 'Dream Works'. Therefore he must take the new tendency of business into account. Business may cause damage to art, he admits. Downloading films for instance ...

Fastfood nation
According to Steven Spielberg we have become a 'fastfood nation', even in a medium of art like filmmaking. "When I was young we spent hours and hours in cinemas. Nowadays youngsters are blogging and mailing for hours and hours. The kids prefer diversity : films on a large screen, but also YouTube films that can be downloaded on a portable machine. In fact they say : we, modern youth, are able to work with multimedia and you, George Lucas, you are only an old geezer just like your friends Coppola, Lucas and Scorsese. We are not you !"

Note : this article was in Dutch. I tried to summarize and to translate it because I think it is a very interesting one. Don't you think so ? Yes, I wonder if we too ... are not old geezers !

[Brian Saberton]

I am a big admirer of both Steven Spielberg and George Lucas though perhaps for different reasons. I am a fan of Speilberg for his sheer film making skills, though I have to say I prefer his earlier work to some of his more recent movies, and Lucas for his pioneering technical work on the Star Wars films that has I think, had a major impact on the way films are made. I like Steven Spielberg's comment that he just wanted to make entertaining films. I sometimes get the feeling that some film makers don't pay enough attention to the entertainment aspect. I think both Spielberg and Lucas have had an extraordinary effect on cinema in general.

I also think that the cinema is the best place to see a film and fully agree with the view that it should be a social experience. You Tube is all very well and I suppose you could argue that the internet provides a community audience, albeit a disconnected one in terms of a collective social experience, but I would far rather go and see a film in a good cinema with other people than watch it on TV or on my computer.

[Dave Watterson]

Peter Travers is the film critic for Rolling Stone magazine and prior to that for People magazine. I think this is from a set of interviews he made for the 40th anniversary issue of Rolling Stone.

It is usually said that George Lucas started some of the "blockbuster" trend by imitating the formulae of the old serial movies but doing it with superb production values. He is thought to be the first major director to realise the potential value of marketing toys, dolls, badges etc to go with his films. His deal with Fox let him have 40% of the earnings on such merchandising. To my mind it is that combination of an action-packed film and heavy merchandising which most people think of when they hear "blockbuster".

Spielberg caught on quickly and the merchandising around "ET" was enormous.

The difference is that those two guys made great movies with more than just mindless action. The makers of many other later blockbusters tended to forget plot, character and so on. They added "international" dimensions by keeping dialogue to a minimum - thus ensuring their work got round the world.

But Spielberg has always made quirky movies as well ... Colour Purple and Terminal to take an old and newer example.

As for the youngsters - certainly many have limited attention span and poor taste ... but there are also a great many who know a lot more about movies than I do. They watch DVDs and pirated copies, they attend cinemas, they can talk knowledgably about cult directors.

At least this thread demonstrates that Willy and Brian are not "Harry Potter" fans or they would be too busy reading the new book to write here. (I interrupt my reading every now and again to keep an eye on the forum and process applicants for registration ... and now I am going back to the Weasley's burrow ...)

Dave

[ned c]

How the older generation enjoys complaining about the next generations. I remember my parents views about jazz (that awful noise cannot be music), those terrible American gangster films where you can't see what is happening (all Films Noir), later The Goon Show (how can you possibly think that is funny), even later "Monty Python's Flying Circus" ("you would think that well educated lads like that could do something better with their lives.").

I agree that George Lucas is a great technical innovator but the Star Wars films are very poor in the quality of characterisation. Most of the actors phone in their performances and ensure that their pension funds are well endowed. Watch Ewan McGregor, a good actor, almost yawn his way through the recent episodes. I suppose it is tough waving a handle about in front of a green/blue screen but these are two dimensional comic book characters. One of the downsides of Lucas' work is that films are now heavy with SFX and light on narrative, but this what the adolescent male wants, nothing to challenge the brain cells and as Hollywood film making is a commercial business and only occassionally an art this is what is made.

Steven Spielberg is different, he works across a much wider range and has experimented with some good some not so good results. But a power in the world of film making and long may he be so.

I agree that the cinema is the best place to see a movie, but only if it is properly set up, sound at a well controlled level, meals not being consumed, no telephone conversations or continous discussions about what is happening on the screen, a floor that your feet don't stick to and an image that is not scratched or dimly illuminated and well enough sound proofed that the explosions on the screen next door don't penetrate the wall.

We have a 54 inch projection TV and can accomadate a group of friends so that we enjoy the social experience without interruption. OK we don't see the first run films on release but we see pristine images, well adjusted Dolby sound and then lean back afterwards and discuss what we have viewed.

The world of film/TV is going through a period of very rapid development, hope I last long enough to enjoy the results!

ned c

[Brian Saberton]

I guess I'm lucky in having access to some very well set up cinemas (including multiplexes) where picture, sound quality, comfort and cleanliness are generally of a high standard. I haven't experienced too many problems with noisy patrons but Glasgow folk tend to be keen and discerning cinemagoers.

Ned, sorry to say but I am a big Goons fan and share the opinion of a lot of people that Spike Millgna (the well known typing error) was a comedy genius. I'm also a fan of Monty Python, mainstream jazz and Star Wars but I'm not offended - it would be a poor world if we all shared the same views! Regarding Ewan McGregor I think he did a fine job on Star Wars; after all, he faced the difficult task of having to play Obi Wan Kenobi in the style of a younger Alec Guinness. George Lucas himself has said that the six films need to be seen as one movie and viewed in sequence from episode one. Oddly enough that's what I have been doing over the last few nights (I just have one more to go). It does put a different perspective on the story and the relationships between the characters when viewed in this way.

[Peter Thomlinson]

Interview with Steven Spielberg in magazine.
1967
I still remember the many uprisings of students and other young people in Paris, Brussels, etc... Me too, I was one of the many protestors in the City of Antwerp against the dangers of nuclear weapons in Europe and against the political establishment.

Quite right too!! I was also one who protested, and I still do.

Blockbusters
In this arrticle the interviewer Peter Travers (probably he's British or American) asked Steven Spielberg if he and George Lucas are not the inventors of blockbusters - "Star Wars" and "Jaws" are good examples - and if they are not responsible of everything that goes wrong with American cinema. By that he meant : merchandising and making the American people simple-minded. These are Peter Travers' words ! Very provocative, isn't it ?

Not really!! I agree with his words!!

Spielberg said that he made 'Schindler's List' for the survivors of the Holocaust, 'Saving Private Ryan' in order to honour the war veterans like his father and 'Munich' to protest against the fight of the USA against terrorism.

And Schindler will be one of the great films he will be remembered for.

Narcissism

Spielberg is now worried about growing narcissism in our modern society. The generation of today is very egocentric. Young people do not accept everything anymore. They can make their own websites including all their hobbies. They know more than the generation of the "golden sixties". Reality-TV is the new tendency ! We must be the stars ! We are brassed off with sitting in front of our TV-sets ! Television must be about us ! That's what the MySpace and iPod-generation think.

I too feel worried about the growing narcissism. But there is still hope.

Films made for cinemas
Business may cause damage to art, he admits. Downloading films for instance ...

This is a huge worry. If people download films and music then the really talented people who in the past have provided us all with great works of art will not have any financial incentive, or funds available, or people who are able to work as a team and produce such output. Therefore EVERYONE will lose out and the only downloads of new work avaialable will be total crap.

Fastfood nation
According to Steven Spielberg we have become a 'fastfood nation', even in a medium of art like filmmaking. "When I was young we spent hours and hours in cinemas. Nowadays youngsters are blogging and mailing for hours and hours. The kids prefer diversity : films on a large screen, but also YouTube films that can be downloaded on a portable machine. In fact they say : we, modern youth, are able to work with multimedia and you, George Lucas, you are only an old geezer just like your friends Coppola, Lucas and Scorsese. We are not you !"

Note : this article was in Dutch. I tried to summarize and to translate it because I think it is a very interesting one. Don't you think so ? Yes, I wonder if we too ... are not old geezers !

It's all in the mind, the age thing. There has been the dichotomy of "them and us" for centuries, between the young and the "old geezers and geezeresses." It is probably needed, and will never change. Where it is dangerous is in its "unsocial" aspect i.e. doing things on ones's own - not being part of something greater.

[ned c]

In answer to Brian, I too am a Goons/Jazz/Python/Films Noir fan which my parents found awful. The point I tried to make is the older generation ALWAYS looks down on what the younger generation sees as new and great. In other words our generation is the new "old geezers" as we moan about wobblycam, hip hop, oof shots, gangsta rap, baggy shorts and so on. It was and always will be so. Both Spielberg and Lucas have now moved into the realm of "old geezers."

You are lucky to have decent cinemas and appreciative audiences. In the multiplexes here six or eight screens will be managed by one 17 year old "projectionist". We have hammered on the projection room door to get the sound levels adjusted, usually preset for the totally deaf. The floor is sticky with the debris of colas and popcorn, the audience take and make telephone calls, discuss the movie and eat complete meals. The explosions on the screen next door come through the wall. the best way to see a film in the local cinemas is to go to an afternoon showing of an unpopular film (The Queen was in this category).

We have a 54 inch projection TV, well adjusted Dolby sound and room for friends to sit in comfort and enjoy pristine picture and sound. Then sit back and discuss the movie afterwards.

In answer to Peter's last comment, many of the great artists have not been part of something greater and have been thoroughly unsocial. This is how genuine innovation happens, rarely a product of the social society. The advent of DV and HDV have made it possible for film makers to break from the high cost of traditional film production and make something very different. In addition to the dichotomy between the old and young there is also the dichotomy between the traditionalists and the innovators.

Ned C

[Brian Saberton]

Sorry Ned, must have had a senior moment and mis read your comments re the goons etc. It's hard to understand why people pay good money to see a film and then spend much of the time eating or talking.

[Willy]

In the multiplexes here six or eight screens will be managed by one 17 year old "projectionist". We have hammered on the projection room door to get the sound levels adjusted, usually preset for the totally deaf. The floor is sticky with the debris of colas and popcorn, the audience take and make telephone calls, discuss the movie and eat complete meals.
_____________________________________________________

American ?
Is this typically American ? Also in Belgium young people eat crisps and popcorn during screenings. That's very irritating. Perhaps in the USA it's even worse. Yes, I must admit ... in that case it's better to watch a movie in your sitting-room. TV-screens are very large nowadays and you can optimize the sound by using some kind of surround system. But the socializing effect is gone.

Eating crisps while listening to a Mozart symphony ?
In my opinion cinema managers should be more severe. They should not allow people to eat and drink.

Do these things happen in concert halls ? I don't think so. Imagine that you are listening to a Mozart symphony in a concert hall while some stupid people are chatting and eating and drinking and calling their friends with their mobile phones ? I think that the director and musicians would stop playing music immediately.

Listening to music is always better in a concert hall. Watching a film should always be better in a cinema.

Generation gap wider than ever before ?
Every generation moans about the younger generations. That's right. I remember my father saying : "When I was young ..."
There is only one big difference. Youth of today are spoilt.... maybe by ourselves. They get everything they want.

When I was a student I had to work at the Antwerp dockyards. I could earn some money to pay my studies. I gave everything to my parents. I had to throw bunches of hard and green bananas on the conveyor belt in the hold of a ship. These bunches were too heavy. I was exhausted and I almost collapsed. I remember I was wearing a yellow T-shirt and a docker called me : "Hey, you yellow canary bird !... We can't do anything with you. You're dismissed ! I found a different job : sitting at a conveyer belt in a factory where beans and other vegatbles were canned.

Going to the cinema was a dream
All this was not to earn some pocket-money. Going to the cinema however was not always possible. My parents had five children. This situation is inconceivable in these modern times. At least in Western Europe. My grandchildren play with their computer every day. They play with all sorts of machines, but unfortunately they don't play creative games.

Multimedia may cause damage to filmmakers as well. That's a sad phenomenon. . I know friends who were reasonably good at making films. Now they enjoy themselves by exchanges (stupid) jokes on internet. They don't want to make films anymore. They don't belong to the old geezers. They do what young people do nowadays.

[Brian Saberton]

I think one of the problems is that cinemas make quite a lot of money from the sale of pop corn, soft drinks, nachos, hot dogs etc (is this healthy eating?) so I don't suppose there is much chance of managers stopping people from taking it into the auditorium. At least around here the punters manage to eat all this stuff relatively quietly!

There is one cinema, the Glasgow Film Theatre, where people don't take food into the auditorium but this is probably because it is an art house cinema concentrating mainly on European films or classics. It is a wonderful cinema has curtains on the screens - quite a novelty nowadays and the presentation is always impecable. They have two cinemas in the building and have recently installed digital projection and last week I went to see the French film Moliere which I thought was an excellent movie and the quality of the digital picture was superb.

I suppose there will always be a generation gap - perhaps it's just human nature. For myself I'm approaching old geezerdom rather too quickly for my liking - I just hope I can avoid being grumpy!

[Dave Watterson]

No doubt I'm the last person to hear about it ... but those of us who enjoy movies should try http://www.angryalien.com/ where you get 30-second movies with animated bunnies doing abbreviated versions of great films.