Jurassic Park

Post by **Dacey** » June 27th, 2006, 5:59 pm

I've said it once, I'll say it again: "The Terminal" was a great little movie.

But it DOES mean something. Critics may be snobs, but I don't think they just like stuff to seem smart or anything. They may DISLIKE stuff to look bright, but not the other way around.

Post by **ShyViolet** » June 27th, 2006, 7:15 pm

Well, just my opinion, but I think that if it works one way, it could work the other way too.

Example: Think of all the Best Picture winners over the years. At the time, they were getting so much hype and praise (often even before their release) that a critic who really didn't like the picture most likely gave it a mediocre review or maybe a "somewhat positive" review just so he or she wouldn't look like a jerk. Some examples: Titanic, Gladiator, Chicago, etc...I think these are all very good pictures but probably not the "Best movie of all time" that they were proclaimed to be at the heyday of their success.

Roger Ebert, who's very respected and doesn't have to worry about what his peers think, (or his subsidiary dropping him) went right out and said that he hated Gladiator, and even though I still think it's a good picture, I can see where he was coming from to an extent.

I think that you can also kind of see that with Cars....the less positive reviews and the negative reviews all have this very apologetic tone to them, like "Oh Pixar's so great, all their other films were wonderful," and "oh the movie looked beautiful" and "well this one just wasn't very good."
Because everyone loves Pixar and how would it look if only they said mean things? (If Cars was a DW film, it would probably have gotten the usual "DW films are all about merchindising and pop culture references" along with a 45% or maybe 50% rating.)

People downgrade stuff to see smart....and they over-praise it, too. Trust me, it happens.

Post by **Meg** » June 27th, 2006, 10:11 pm

(If Cars was a DW film, it would probably have gotten the usual "DW films are all about merchindising and pop culture references" along with a 45% or maybe 50% rating.)

Yeah, 'cause after all, OtH was panned, right?

Post by **Dacey** » June 28th, 2006, 10:33 am

Good point, Meg!

Let's PLEASE not turn this into another "Dreamworks Vs. Pixar" thread, thank you very much!

In any case, Speilberg didn't ruin Jeff's career, and if he did, it certainly wasn't because he was too busy with Tom Hanks.

Post by **Meg** » June 28th, 2006, 11:01 am

I've said it once, I'll say it again: "The Terminal" was a great little movie.

Tom Hanks was really good in that movie.

Post by **ShyViolet** » June 28th, 2006, 1:00 pm

Yeah, 'cause after all, OtH was panned, right?

No, but other DW films have been...

SharkTale: 35%

Sinbad: 47%

Spirit: 68%

Madagascar: 55%

And I think they were all good films...I bet critics will be in a dillemma when Flushed Away comes out. How can they rag on DW, because after all, the film is also half-Aardman. Hmmm.....
(and it's no secret how popular Nick Park is in the animation community, what with the Annie sweep for Were-Rabbit and all. It'll certainly be interesting to see how animation blogs deal with this collaberation.)

Plus even Over the Hedge's reviews were kind of grudging, like, oh, I can't find anything wrong with this film, but it can't be that great because it's DW. So it gets **1/2 stars instead of *** or ****.

Well anyway, you're right, let's not get into DW vs. Pixar again.

Post by **Meg** » June 28th, 2006, 3:16 pm

No, but other DW films have been...

SharkTale: 35%

Sinbad: 47%

Spirit: 68%

Madagascar: 55%

Antz: 97% (Even better than A Bug's Life!)

Prince of Egypt: 80%

Shrek: 88%

Shrek 2: 88%

Over the Hedge: 74%

Spirit was also fresh, but you've already mentioned it...And, while they're Aardman, Chicken Run and Curse of the Were-Rabbit also scored very high.

If I ever get "The Best of Will Ferrel" I think it'll have one segment with him.

Yeah, he was. The skit he was in was SOOOO funny!

Post by **ShyViolet** » June 28th, 2006, 3:35 pm

Yeah, he was. The skit he was in was SOOOO funny! Very Happy

Yeah, I loved that too!

Almost as good as "more Cowbell!"

Post by **Ben** » June 28th, 2006, 3:39 pm

Okay...just gotta pick on some points here...

"Steve has been sliding into major complacency and mediocrity, while JK at least has been trying different things"

What, like hitting a CGI formula and recycling the same kind of movies up over and over again while "boring" Steve tries to make enjoyable films with a point and push the envelope of what is expected from him?

"Spielberg could have made so many great movies even after Schindler if he wanted to--artistic films AND audience- pleasing ones."

As I said in another thread somewhere, the double-whammy of Jurassic Park and Schindler's List in one year is pretty tough to beat, just as it has taken Cameron years to get over Titanic in '97. At least Spielberg is MAKING movies and we have Minority Report, Catch Me If You Can and the good bits of War Of The Worlds to be grateful for...

"For ten years he even had his own studio, and he could have made changes in TV, videogames, all kinds of entertainment."

Well, he didn't own a studio. He owned a glorified production company with two other people, all of which had their own agendas. Geffen was happy to play along, but DWs was the brainchild of JK who wanted Mouse House revenge. Spielberg, at the end of the day, was happy with Amblin, but never folded it in. I've said before that he never believed in DWs like JK believed in DWs. They tried with games and internet ventures (Pop.com) that both crashed and burned due to their over-achieving status to try and become an "instant Disney". Chaplin tried it with United Artists, Coppola tried it with American Zoetrope. It was just never going to work.

"If he wanted to, he could take us so many places. But he stopped caring...a long time ago."

Yeah, but I don't think he stopped caring. The fully rounded quality of his movies service that, and Minority Report showed he could still pull off the thrill rides while making a more gritty film. I just don't think the material is there in modern filmmaking, period (I did notice you liked MR).

"Critics give good reviews half the time because they don't want to look stupid in their circle of friends or colleagues."

His films do actually drawn in negative views. The Terminal and Munich were largely shunned, critic wise, and are seen overall as flops.

"Plus the films he releases are often half-owned by Paramount, Warner Bros. or Universal."

See the DWs point above. They were never a "studio" and never able to fully finance their own films, hence the co-pros. All the big live-action DWs films were funded with other studios because DWs simply didn't have the cash. Their existence was very "hand to mouth".

"He could do much, much better."

Maybe he's just burned out? Or take longer to prepare realy good movies? Trying to churn out two every 18 months looks good, but you lose the substance. Although I wish they'd leave the Indy Trilogy alone, I'm glad the script is taking so long...it might mean that the film is actually worth something!

Post by **ShyViolet** » June 28th, 2006, 3:50 pm

Yeah...I do get your points. And I admire Spielberg for trying "different" kinds of films, even if the ideas are a big weird sometimes.

But I still think JK has made good films...plus he basically carried most of DW (the original company) on his own.

At least Spielberg is MAKING movies and we have Minority Report, Catch Me If You Can and the good bits of War Of The Worlds to be grateful for...

That's true.

I still wish he'd agreed to do Harry Potter though...

Catch Me If You Can

I really didn't like this film much but...that's me.

Although I wish they'd leave the Indy Trilogy alone, I'm glad the script is taking so long...it might mean that the film is actually worth something!

That'd be cool...I won't count it out yet.

Post by **Ben** » June 28th, 2006, 3:58 pm

ShyViolet wrote:JK basically carried most of DW (the original company) on his own.

Um...no.

JK concentrated on animation from day one. The Ten Commandments was his baby.

The live-action side of DWs was handled by Spielberg's Amblin team (I remember Kathy Kennedy saying she was only going to stick around for the opening and was still there at the end) while they had a revolving door of execs including Walter Parked and Mike DeLuca.

"Most of DWs"? Try one division of it.

Post by **Dacey** » June 29th, 2006, 4:16 pm

Maybe someone's pointed this out, but Speilberg actually MAKES movies. JK only oversees their productions, inserts some good ideas here and there, sometimes helps with the casting, etc. But Speilberg, on the other hand, is the one MAKING movies. And he's always very involved.

Further more, and I haven't seen all of his films, but are there really any "Bad" Speilberg movies. I mean, yeah, some of his films don't measure up to his better ones, but are there any that can really be called "Awful"? Just asking.

Post by **ShyViolet** » June 30th, 2006, 2:17 pm

JK only oversees their productions, inserts some good ideas here and there, sometimes helps with the casting, etc. But Speilberg, on the other hand, is the one MAKING movies. And he's always very involved.

With all due respect, he does much more than that. Jeffrey is also very involved with the films (did you know he actually directed The Road to El Dorado?) and the directors all answer ANSWER TO HIM on every production.
He has the final say. At DreamWorks, he's more than an executive. Walt Disney didn't personally direct, write or draw any of the films he was involved in, but no one every says that he "didn't make them."

I'm not saying that JK is a genius equal to Walt Disney or anything, but he's just as involved as Walt was on his motion pictures. He spends 98% of his time on animation. It's his life, period. It's the reason he started DW in the first place.

Anyway, I understand the confusion, because most producers, especially exec producers, don't do a whole lot. (and no one is ever sure of what they do at all) JK may have "overseen" things at Disney in the way that a producer does, but at DW, he's totally involved.

These are his films, all the way.

(Particularly Prince of Egypt and El Dorado.) He's just as much a filmmaker as Spielberg.

And if you're going to blame him for the films being bad (which practically everyone does) he's got to get the credit for the films being good too!

Further more, and I haven't seen all of his films, but are there really any "Bad" Speilberg movies

1941 and Always are supposed to be kind of lame.

Post by **Dacey** » June 30th, 2006, 2:43 pm

Some good points there, ShyVi, but...

These are his films, all the way. (Particularly Prince of Egypt and El Dorado.) He's just as much a filmmaker as Spielberg.

Even though JK is very involved and passionate about his work, it still seems like a bit of a stretch to say he's "Just as much of a filmmaker" as Speilberg. Speilberg is a director. Katzenberg's an executive, and even if he's very involved, he's still not a director.

Didn't that "Bibo" guy direct "El Dorado"?

Post by **ShyViolet** » June 30th, 2006, 2:57 pm

From IMBD:

Directed by
Bibo Bergeron (as Eric 'Bibo' Bergeron)
Will Finn
Don Paul
David Silverman
Jeffrey Katzenberg (uncredited)

JK was a director, although uncredited. But basically all those other directors were working for him, not the other way around. They were basically assistants, not actual directors. At least that's how I see it. He had authority over everything they did, just like Steve would on one of his pictures. Or George Lucas on Star Wars (he didn't direct Empire or Jedi) So in my view, he basically did direct the film. There are usually three, even four directors on a DW project...with all due respect to them, it's not like Spieberg directing one of his movies and having final say on everything. Many animation artists (even those who dislike JK) have said about the films at DW "You can't even blame the directors, everyone knows there is only ONE director at DW."

Katzenberg's an executive, and even if he's very involved, he's still not a director.

Yup, the stigma of the "executive."

But he's not in any way a typical executive (technically John Lassetter is a creative executive at Pixar and he has authority over his collegue's films, just as as he and Ed do on the WDFA pictures now.)

Just look up ANY article on POE...
That's why he does the interviews--not to grandstand, but because he was totally involved in the film. Of course he doesn't want to seem like a jerk so he always gives credit to the directors (they get way more time then he does in the HBO specials) and the artists.

From AnimationNation: (Steve G's post)

JK is not a genius or a saint, but he is one of the few people producing animation who actually cares. Sometimes I don't agree with the decisions he makes. I'm sure people wouldn't agree with every decision I would make in his position. Or you either.

I don't care what his personal reasons are...and I don't care what anyone's reasons are as long as they continue to try to make a worthwhile product. And Jeffrey qualifies. whether you like that product or not or whether that product makes money or not is beside the point. He doesn't have to continue - and if I were him, I might not - but he does. I guarantee you, he wants to make good film. I don't care if it's so he can get an award or more money. The end result is the same. Do you think anyone making film does it for their own selfsatisfaction? Everyone wants to make money and have an audience appreciate what they did. Maybe Richard Williams is doing it for himself (he's a loon), but I doubt even that. Even Williams would love everyone to declare him a film making genius.

Why else would JK, at the studio's expense, have classes to help improve the story dept? If not to improve the product. He admits to not knowing all the answers. He needs help and choices. But it's not a democracy - it's a business.

And this one (Dave's post)

and in a way he has created his own theory of animation. He was very into the David Lean way of making film. Breathtaking landscape and slightly more intelligent and adult themes. I mean , POE ? Religion and cartoons in a feature ? Man that takes mighty nads. No one can say he didn't go where no one had gone . I've always said it sure wasn't my sensability but you have to admire his execution and vision . If it were anyone else people would applaud that kind of risk taking but Jeffrey is Jeffrey and people pass on hard feelings even if they aren't their own. Strip the gossip and lies meant just to hide envy and you would have to agree , he has made a huge difference in this business. Everyone is just trying to do their best work.

They have both worked as DW animators, directly alongside JK.