Spielberg (2017)

Steven Spielberg has always been open about himself in interviews, about his work and life. So there is very little that is new in this documentary apart from Spielberg doing some second unit directing work in Scarface (1983.)This is a long documentary looking at Spielberg's rise as a director. Sneaking into Universal Studios, starting in television and then moving into movies. He quickly establishing himself as a wunderkind with Jaws and Close Encounters of the Third Kind and then made the (then) biggest film of all time with ET.However it does come across as too much of a celebratory backslapping promotional piece with friends, families, collaborators, actors and fellow directors. There is the bit in the documentary where everyone wondered how they could produce realistic dinosaurs for Jurassic Park. They went down to see Dennis Muren who showed what he had in his computer and they jumped with joy with what they saw. That is Dennis Muren who previously worked with Spielberg, is an ace special effects supremo who works for George Lucas's company ILM. I have a fair idea they knew what to expect.There is very little by way of criticism here apart from the failure of his comedy 1941. Nothing about the reasons for the failure of his first marriage to Amy Irving, the relative failure of Dreamworks or even the difficulties he has these days of getting his film projects funded.

What's confusing about this documentary is not what they decided to show, but what they decided to leave out. Maybe its too early for a full retrospective as the subject is still alive and working and creating, but then what exactly is the point of this documentary, other than it comes out on the 40th anniversary year of "Close Encounters"? After Spielberg shuffles off this mortal coil the interviews gained in the process of making this film will serve admirably in the making of what will probably have to be a series of documentary films that follow Steven Spielberg's life and career, but as it stands this seems like a Blu-Ray special feature. There are many years and films that are completely skipped or glossed over, there is barely a mention of all the success he's had as a producer, and there's no real build up or glory to his triumphs or his failures. It's surface-level and polite. it doesn't pose tough questions or try to answer anything either. I get that this is a puff piece, that in no way would anyone sign off on a documentary that paints them in a bad light, but this doesn't even make Spielberg *complicated*, even his relationship with his father is immediately forgiven and then brushed aside. What would be more interesting, and perhaps more revealing, would be Behind the Scenes documentaries that we already have that feature Spielberg, strung together with new interviews, and footage that presents context, and present his life this way. As it stands what this Doc offers is a quick overview and celebrity cameos that isn't all together uninteresting if only hindered by it's inability to commit to deep dives of the subject's career.

"Spielberg" (2017 release; 147 min.) is a documentary about the life and times of legendary film maker Steven Spielberg. As the movie opens, Spielberg describes in glorious detail the profound impression left on him when he saw "Lawrence of Arabia" in the theater in 1962, and again and again (much later in the documentary, Spielberg confesses he still watches that movie at least once a year). We then go to the "Bridge of Spies" movie set, where Spielberg is seen giving detailed instructions as a particular scene is being prepped. Next comes a lengthy passage about "Jaws", whose unexpected commercial success (in particular in view of the almost disastrous production) "changed my life", Spielberg comments. "It Was a free pass into my future". At this point we are less than 15 min. into the documentary.Couple of comments: this documentary is directed by Susan Lacy, best known for being the Executive Producer of the American masters TV series. Here she presents a portrait of Steven Spielberg. While of course spending lots of time on Spielberg's key movies (none gets more screen time than "Schindler's List"), we also get a peek into Spielberg's personal life (reason that I refer to "the life and times"). "I am a child of divorce" could well easily have been the sub-title of the documentary, as Spielberg points out time and again how profoundly this has affected his film-making, and why there are so many "dissolution of family" themes in his films. We also get some fascinating 8mm footage from the Spielberg family when Steven was growing up (no mention, though, that Steven was born in Cincinnati--where I live). Lacy interviews a ton of people, including Steven's parents and three sisters, but of course also many contemporaries (in particular George Lucas, Brian de Palma, Martin Scorsese and Francis Ford Coppola). But in the end, the most fun remains watching the many highlights of Spielberg's most important movies, commentated by Spielberg himself. Counting his early 70s TV work, Spielberg has been making movies for almost half a century! It simply blows the mind. You may or may not like Spielberg's style of movies, but he undeniably has been one of the top directors in Hollywood for decades, and still is to this day. Can't wait for his upcoming movie "Ready Player One", to be released in early 2018."Spielberg" premiered at this year's New York Film Festival to good acclaim, and recently opened up on HBO, where I saw it a few days ago. While the documentary isn't "revolutionary" (and clearly was made with the blessing of the Spielberg family), I nevertheless quite enjoyed it and was amazed how quickly these 2 1/2 hrs. flew by. If you are a film buff, or a fan of Steven Spielberg, you cannot go wrong with this.

This could have been great, especially given the access the filmmakers obviously had and the stature of the people interviewed. Instead it's an overlong, boring and unimaginatively grovelling look at Spielberg's life and career. Apart from a few tantalizing clips of a young Spielberg at work there's absolutely nothing new here and it just sinks into an extended EPK-level parade of sycophantic comments and backslapping, intended, it seems, more to curry favor with Hollywood establishment power than to offer any perception or insight into a master filmmaker, his films and his methods. Like the syrupy sentimentality of Spielberg at his worst, this is more of a protracted, tedious, sugar-coated eulogy than a perceptive and insightful documentary. It seems to me that the filmmakers are more fearful of incurring Spielberg's displeasure than presenting something engaging, new and compelling. What an awful waste of an incredible opportunity.