If it's crap ... We'll tell you
i know it isnt really fair comparing these two considering Spielberg is consistently making movies while Lucas seems to be in semi-retirement, but i wanna know ur thoughts on the two. Both men represent two opposite spectrums of filmmaking while still having a common middleground (being that they are mostly blockbuster filmmakers).
it intrigues me that both Spielberg and Lucas started off the same way with top grossing sci-fi/adventure classics in the 70s and 80s, but one of them branched off into more personal, dramatic affairs while the other stayed attached to the franchise that made him a household name in the eyes of the moviegoing public. Both men have altered their films numorously with digital corrections, although one of them has recently disowned his digital alterations and prefers preservation. One of them prefers to shoot on 35mm and occasionally uses practical effects while the other is trying desparately to push the digital envelop by creating almost entirely on bluescreen. Both have had their share of disappointing films (Spielberg: 1941, The Lost World, The Terminal, Minority Report; Lucas:.........too obvious).
so please just give me your general thoughts on the two, whether it concerns their films, style, technique, ect.
also, please note that this is NOT an excuse just to bash the prequels. any complaints with those or any of their films have to be backed up with sound critique and not just "Lucas raped my childhood"
Lucas has directed six feature-length films in his career. One was his first, two are considered to be classics, and the last three are absolute abominations. So he's two for five, if you don't count THX 1138 (which I personally haven't seen).
Spielberg has directed a grand total of 28 feature-length films in his career, with four more on the way. Undoubtedly he's a more prolific director, but at least half of those are considered to be classics (you can argue the exact number).
There's no question and no debate, honestly. The writing in the prequels is absolute garbage, and Lucas' direction can be called amateurish at best, and he hasn't done a damn thing since.
1. Hes more active
2. He directed a timeless classic, ET
3. Hes makes alot of the rides at Universal Orlando
i'm with you on this. ET is one of my all time faves, but Episode 4? The only things that come close are episodes 5 and 6, LoTR, TDK, and various other acronyms of awesome movies.
you know, i kind of see Lucas as more of a general idea man, while Spielberg is more in touch with the nuances of directing that make that idea watchable. Star Wars and Indiana Jones are two of the greatest series' ever (we're talking originals here), but Spielberg can direct anything and you're spellbound. being more of an idea man myself, i relate to Lucas more. but i gotta give it to Spielberg here, as a director AND producer, i don't think there's any contest...
actually, i DID see AG. please don't hate me... but i thought it was just OK.
then again, i was about 16 years old when i saw it, so maybe it didn't reach me like it might if i watched it again.
but you know, i loved Episode 4 so much! i thought it was done so well... so yeah, i feel you on him being a good director. better than Spielberg though...?