Would you consider Spielberg an all- time great?

Would you consider Spielberg an all- time great? Mar 12, 2017 3:25:20 GMT via mobile spiderwort likes this

Quote

Post by Flynn on Mar 12, 2017 3:25:20 GMT

Mar 12, 2017 0:43:33 GMT @weedinator said:

Mar 12, 2017 0:31:19 GMT @graham said:

Nope. Do enlighten me.

Okaaay...well, back in 1993, he made this little movie you apparently never heard about called 'Schindler's List'. It was supposedly a 'true story', but 'ole Stevie just had to 'up' the evil when it came to portraying Nazis, and showed them doing things that never even happened. Make more money that way.

Also, as a producer, he made many documentaries on the subject, one of which, 'The Last Days', had horrifying 'eyewitness testimony' that has since been debunked as pure bullshit. And it won an Oscar.

Spielberg vilified Nazis, not Germans. There's a big distinction. I can understand why he did that, though. He's Jewish, and the Nazis treated the Jews very badly. Spielberg was clearly working through his feelings about Nazis. That's part of being a good filmmaker, and I don't hold it against him.

Did he portray Nazi's wrong? Honestly, I don't know. I would have to do more research, but regardless, his goal was to make a fictional film. That always involves diversions from reality for purposes of tighter narratives and better motivation. That has been done in supposedly true stories since the beginning of films based on real events. "True stories" are never completely true, not a single one of them.

As for the discrepancy in eyewitness accounts of the events, this woman was around the age of 10 when these events happened. Her memory is no doubt fuzzy by now. Just because her accounts aren't consistent doesn't mean she is intentionally lying.

You can hold these things against Spielberg if you want to, but personally I think it's a little harsh.

In any case, none of this has anything to do with Spielberg's abilities as a director.