BOC: Random thoughts post

[Laj Waldner]

Andy Gilham wrote:

> > > _*Batteries Not Included_ was directed by Matthew Robbins, although
> > > Spielberg was executive producer - it was originally intended
> > as an episode
> > > of "Steven Spielberg's Amazing Stories".
> > >
> >
> > Wasn't aware of that, that being the only movie I can remember of
> > the top of my
> > head that had something to do with spielberg that I didn't like,
> > can't say I
> > dislike any of hisDirectorial work then. I'll be the first to
> > admit I really
> > don't know a lot about the differences between the Producer, Executive
> > Producer, and Director, except the obvious ones of coarse. I know
> > the Producer
> > has more "pull" than the director, but the differences between Executive
> > Producer and Producer im not sure. But if Spielberg was EP of BNI
> > he had to of
> > had something to do with the outcome.
> >
>
> Well, the producer exercises general control, and handles a lot of the
> business aspects.  Artie on _Larry Sanders_.
>
> The word "executive" serves to distance SS further in this case, though.  I
> doubt (but of course I wouldn't presume to know for sure) he had anything
> "hands-on"  to do with _*bni_.  What I would say he's guilty of - and your
> confusion bears this out - is allowing his name to become a brand, and
> allowing his publicity to label any film he produces, executive produces,
> has lunch with the director of, etc as "a Spielberg film".
>

True, I see your point, I saw the movie only once when I was 15 I think, and it
has always rang in the back of my head as a Spielberg flick, till now :-). I
guess you got to really watch, hollywood loves to do that, he might not of ever
had a choice whether his name appeared on the poster or not. Remember seeing the
repackaged "Mazes and Monsters" with the name "Tom Hanks" appearing in even
larger letters above it :-).

> My take on SS, fwiw, is that he's an exceptional craftsman who desperately
> wants to be an _auteur_ - hence he's not satisfied with the enormous popular
> and financial success of his entertainments; he also (rather
> self-consciously, I feel) turns to his "issue" films.
>

Interesting point, "Schindler's List" was a good movie though, but then again so
was "Jaws". He pulled both those movies off quite well, must be multitalented
;-). Maybe a mixture of the two is what is needed, "Color Purple" meets
"Jurassic Park", I  would pay 8 bucks to see that ;-).

> How the hell did we get on to this?
>
> - Andy
>
> ObCD: Garbage - _Version 2.0_
>
> mailto:Andy.Gilham at btinternet.com; http://www.btinternet.com/~andy.gilham

Ya, it's a bit off subject, wonder what BOC or Hawkwind thought of Spielberg
;-).
Still waiting for Ralph Bakshi to get together with Sandy and Albert to produce
"IMAGINOS: THE MOTION PICTURE", title subject to change of coarse :-).

Laj.