![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
selenakI saw E.T. on TV on Boxing Day - the 20th anniversary edition - and am glad how well it holds up, considering that last year I had a fierce Spielberg vs Emmerich debate with one of our exports to Hollywood. E.T. at this point was a fond memory of my childhood, but I hadn't rewatched it in recent years. And my loathing of Roland Emmerich or more precisely his movies was fueled by having had to watch The Patriot (shudder!), the trailer for Independence Day (this made sure I never watched the movie, so was on somewhat shaky grounds during the debate but managed to bluff my way through), and Stargate (James Spader was good; Jaye Davidson was underused; a mixed bag all in all).
Anyway, E.T. The first thing that struck me (pleasantly) on this adult viewing was that Spielberg, partly to blame for all the rushed storytelling in modern cinema due to the Indiana Jones flicks, takes his time here. Building up atmosphere, and the mystery. And he's careful not to show us E.T. in detail - we see shapes and body parts, mostly hands - until Elliot sees him for the first time.
Also, Melissa Matheson's script is great. Elliot, his siblings and their mother make for a convincing post-divorce family, likeable but not idealized, and the sibling interaction is completely realistic (says she who remembers the arguments and alliances back when). Once in a conversation with RozK I mentioned how relieved I was that Spielberg didn't present John and Agatha in Minority Report as a couple, because he's much better with friendships than with love stories. I had forgotten, of course, that you can classify E.T. as a love story, just not in the romantic/sexual sense. And by the time we arrive at Elliot's I love you, both script and direction have made sure that it's heartfelt, true, and not funny in the least. Oh, and there is a blessed absence of Spielberg's usual father/son obsession. Of course the missing father is mentioned, but he's never a major issue in the movie, and there is no replacement father figure. Ms Matheson should have written more scripts for Steven Spielberg.
Of course the best script can be damaged by bad acting or bad direction. There aren't many directors who have such a consistent record of coaxing good performances out of children, and E.T. is a showcase of why Spielberg rules here. (For the record, the best child performer in a Spielberg movie in my opinion is either Christian Bale in Empire of the Sun or Haley J. Osment in A.I.; I tend to favour the former because the emotional journey is much stronger.) Little Drew Barrymore is never annoyingly sweet as Gertie (and certainly not above blackmail), and Henry Thomas (whatever became of him?) as Elliot sells both the frustrated and obnoxious younger brother in the opening scenes, the curiosity battling with fear when he meets E.T. and the love and heartbrokenness at the end. And for the first time, I noticed consciously how Spielberg keeps the E.T.-and-the-children perspective consistent by showing most adults only from their hips downwards, as an endless, threatening gallery of legs (the only adult we see in full figure and close-up for a longer period of time is the mother, Mary). And such small but realistic touches as one of Michael's buddies making a move towards Mary's unsuspecting backside, only to be held back at the last minute by Michael. It's crude, but it's such a teenage boy thing to do.
Spielberg and his sense of wonder about two life forms meeting and joining. The forces of government, the military, are definitely the bad guys here, the threatening force, turning the family home into a sterilized zone in which death happens. Even when they're neutral or well-meaning, like the Man With The Keyes, they have to be evaded and outwitted because they want to possess, not co-exist. It's truly the opposite of anything Emmerich. Or of beat-the-invading-Aliens movies in general. I know John in the Farscape pilot brings up E.T. ironically, but in truth, first season John finding his way round Moya, still amazed at everything and ready to try the peaceful way first, is very much like Elliot in this movie.
Quickly surfing, I noticed the holidays produced some great fanfic. For example, a look at X2 villain William Stryker, and his motivations. And an utterly convincing story about Angel and Buffy during Christmas, post-Chosen, post-Connor. You know, usually in fanfic starring both one of them is bound to be characterized badly, and/or their history since season 3 BTVS ignored. If it's not a story with a One True Love agenda, it's a story wherein Buffy gets bashed, or less often Angel. Or, most obnoxiously, Buffy is some sort of award for the best vampire with a soul, depending on the author's agenda. Not so here. This is Angel, alienated from his friends whose memories he wiped, bereft of the son he saved and destroyed, and with Spike issues of which Buffy is only one; this is Buffy who knows all too well about the strangeness of not being one of a kind anymore, who thanks to Dawn knows what it means to raise a child, who has no intentions of restarting a romance but has a go at friendship instead. It's a story about much more important things than who ends up with whom in the end. I loved it.
Speaking of Buffy,![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
malkingrey in her version of the "Unpopular Opinions" meme a while a go included what's quickly becoming my favourite statement on the matter here:
I like Buffy. Not just the perky, wisecracking early-seasons teenybopper Buffy, but Buffy all the way through to and including the thousand-yard-stare, seven-years-on-the-front-lines veteran Slayer Buffy. And I'm sometimes disturbed by the way in which she often gets condemned for those same behaviors and character traits which, if she were a guy, would have fanwriters lining up to dispense chicken soup and comfort to his wounded, suffering soul.
Moving to other fandoms: I found a great Discworld fanfic, a Vetinari pov . Be warned, though: this one makes only sense if you've read Night Watch.
And lo and behold, a Gone With the Wind fanfic from Ashley Wilkes' perspective. As Ashley is probably the Riley of GWTW fandom, treasure the rarity.
Lastly, a Sandman story, set in the Doll's House era. Desire and Dream, and Hob Gadling caught in between. Not your usual interpretation of the Dream/Desire feud, but given the nature of the Endless, it's certainly a viable interpretation.
Anyway, E.T. The first thing that struck me (pleasantly) on this adult viewing was that Spielberg, partly to blame for all the rushed storytelling in modern cinema due to the Indiana Jones flicks, takes his time here. Building up atmosphere, and the mystery. And he's careful not to show us E.T. in detail - we see shapes and body parts, mostly hands - until Elliot sees him for the first time.
Also, Melissa Matheson's script is great. Elliot, his siblings and their mother make for a convincing post-divorce family, likeable but not idealized, and the sibling interaction is completely realistic (says she who remembers the arguments and alliances back when). Once in a conversation with RozK I mentioned how relieved I was that Spielberg didn't present John and Agatha in Minority Report as a couple, because he's much better with friendships than with love stories. I had forgotten, of course, that you can classify E.T. as a love story, just not in the romantic/sexual sense. And by the time we arrive at Elliot's I love you, both script and direction have made sure that it's heartfelt, true, and not funny in the least. Oh, and there is a blessed absence of Spielberg's usual father/son obsession. Of course the missing father is mentioned, but he's never a major issue in the movie, and there is no replacement father figure. Ms Matheson should have written more scripts for Steven Spielberg.
Of course the best script can be damaged by bad acting or bad direction. There aren't many directors who have such a consistent record of coaxing good performances out of children, and E.T. is a showcase of why Spielberg rules here. (For the record, the best child performer in a Spielberg movie in my opinion is either Christian Bale in Empire of the Sun or Haley J. Osment in A.I.; I tend to favour the former because the emotional journey is much stronger.) Little Drew Barrymore is never annoyingly sweet as Gertie (and certainly not above blackmail), and Henry Thomas (whatever became of him?) as Elliot sells both the frustrated and obnoxious younger brother in the opening scenes, the curiosity battling with fear when he meets E.T. and the love and heartbrokenness at the end. And for the first time, I noticed consciously how Spielberg keeps the E.T.-and-the-children perspective consistent by showing most adults only from their hips downwards, as an endless, threatening gallery of legs (the only adult we see in full figure and close-up for a longer period of time is the mother, Mary). And such small but realistic touches as one of Michael's buddies making a move towards Mary's unsuspecting backside, only to be held back at the last minute by Michael. It's crude, but it's such a teenage boy thing to do.
Spielberg and his sense of wonder about two life forms meeting and joining. The forces of government, the military, are definitely the bad guys here, the threatening force, turning the family home into a sterilized zone in which death happens. Even when they're neutral or well-meaning, like the Man With The Keyes, they have to be evaded and outwitted because they want to possess, not co-exist. It's truly the opposite of anything Emmerich. Or of beat-the-invading-Aliens movies in general. I know John in the Farscape pilot brings up E.T. ironically, but in truth, first season John finding his way round Moya, still amazed at everything and ready to try the peaceful way first, is very much like Elliot in this movie.
Quickly surfing, I noticed the holidays produced some great fanfic. For example, a look at X2 villain William Stryker, and his motivations. And an utterly convincing story about Angel and Buffy during Christmas, post-Chosen, post-Connor. You know, usually in fanfic starring both one of them is bound to be characterized badly, and/or their history since season 3 BTVS ignored. If it's not a story with a One True Love agenda, it's a story wherein Buffy gets bashed, or less often Angel. Or, most obnoxiously, Buffy is some sort of award for the best vampire with a soul, depending on the author's agenda. Not so here. This is Angel, alienated from his friends whose memories he wiped, bereft of the son he saved and destroyed, and with Spike issues of which Buffy is only one; this is Buffy who knows all too well about the strangeness of not being one of a kind anymore, who thanks to Dawn knows what it means to raise a child, who has no intentions of restarting a romance but has a go at friendship instead. It's a story about much more important things than who ends up with whom in the end. I loved it.
Speaking of Buffy,
malkingrey in her version of the "Unpopular Opinions" meme a while a go included what's quickly becoming my favourite statement on the matter here: I like Buffy. Not just the perky, wisecracking early-seasons teenybopper Buffy, but Buffy all the way through to and including the thousand-yard-stare, seven-years-on-the-front-lines veteran Slayer Buffy. And I'm sometimes disturbed by the way in which she often gets condemned for those same behaviors and character traits which, if she were a guy, would have fanwriters lining up to dispense chicken soup and comfort to his wounded, suffering soul.
Moving to other fandoms: I found a great Discworld fanfic, a Vetinari pov . Be warned, though: this one makes only sense if you've read Night Watch.
And lo and behold, a Gone With the Wind fanfic from Ashley Wilkes' perspective. As Ashley is probably the Riley of GWTW fandom, treasure the rarity.
Lastly, a Sandman story, set in the Doll's House era. Desire and Dream, and Hob Gadling caught in between. Not your usual interpretation of the Dream/Desire feud, but given the nature of the Endless, it's certainly a viable interpretation.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Henry Thomas
Date: 2003-12-27 10:26 am (UTC)thanks!
Date: 2003-12-27 10:38 am (UTC)Re: thanks!
Date: 2003-12-27 11:07 am (UTC)Re: thanks!
Date: 2003-12-27 01:03 pm (UTC)And Marc Blucas plays his brother Neil. Unfortunately, I cannot look at Marc Blucas without thinking, "There's Riley Finn! What's he doing here!" It threw me out of the movie whenever he was on screen.
Hate to keep whoring this out...
Date: 2003-12-27 11:04 am (UTC)Oh, and there is a blessed absence of Spielberg's usual father/son obsession. Of course the missing father is mentioned, but he's never a major issue in the movie, and there is no replacement father figure.
Actually, I disagree here. E.T. himself could be seen as a replacement father figure for Elliot's father. The whole story, as I saw it, was about a young, lonely boy who fills in the void left by his father's absence with a magical creature who can fill all of these needs--love, protection, warmth, healing. For me, that isn't a bad thing, though. I have always been fascinated by Spielberg's father/son motifs in his films, because I really grew up without a father also. Unlike Spielberg, I never felt the need to duplicate this through fantasy, because I grew up with my grandfather, who really filled all the paternal needs I ever had in my young life. But I still enjoy seeing these concepts play out in his films. It gives them a very Campbellian/Arthurian vibe of the hero growing up having never known his father.
No, I hadn't read it yet...
Date: 2003-12-27 12:04 pm (UTC)Hm, E.T. as a father figure. Never saw the possibility - he seemed more like the classic "invisible friend" archetype to me - but it's certainly a viable interpretation. (BTW, Gigolo Joe in A.I.: E.T. in another age? Debate.)
The father/son motif in Spielberg's films: in truth I only really minded and resented it once, in Hook, but then I hated Hook anyway. I certainly enjoyed the two Henry Joneses. The most interesting variations to me are in Empire of the Sun and Minority Report because there the father figure is corrupt and proves to be a false hope.
Um. That sounds if I'm against fathers, which I'm not; what I do like are twists and turns.
Re: No, I hadn't read it yet...
Date: 2003-12-27 12:20 pm (UTC)Thanks! The idea sort of came to me as a reaction to my professor giving me an A on my last paper but telling me that it was written very well thus the grade but that he wished I'd think more outside the box for my next paper than just spitting back research and what we'd learned in class.
Hm, E.T. as a father figure. Never saw the possibility - he seemed more like the classic "invisible friend" archetype to me - but it's certainly a viable interpretation. (BTW, Gigolo Joe in A.I.: E.T. in another age? Debate.)
Actually, I'll modify what I said earlier because I don't think E.T. is the same sort of completely linear father replacement as in some other Spielberg films. More like I would say a blend of your idea and what I said originally...He could be seen as a sort of "invisible" or imaginary friend that I think was brought on by the absence of Elliot's father, to fill in the psychological holes that occurred when he left. He fills some of the paternal needs, but is also just a good friend to Elliot, and unlike a classic father figure, someone Elliot himself needs to save. So I'd say he represents a sort of love that can help replace for a short time the void Elliot felt when his father left, but not necessarily a complete father replacement. Sorry if I'm being redundant here. Not in an edity mood at the moment. ;o) Gigolo Joe as E.T. in another age? Interesting! I like that idea very much. Maybe I'll use that for a future paper, if you don't mind.
I certainly enjoyed the two Henry Joneses.
Now you got me in the mood to see Holy Grail! Just watched Raiders the other day, so I guess it's high time I see that one again, too. As for Temple of Doom, I like to pretend it never existed and move on from there. The first and last Indy films work much better as companion pieces than the middle one, anyway, which really is many ways thematically and stylistically out of place in the series.
re: Minority Report, I have yet to see it, but I plan on doing so very soon.
Re: No, I hadn't read it yet...
Date: 2003-12-27 09:53 pm (UTC)Now you got me in the mood to see Holy Grail!
"The Knights who say Ni. I hate these guys."
I pretend the same thing...
Date: 2003-12-27 10:59 pm (UTC)Gigolo Joe: go ahead!
Minority Report: once you've watched it, try to track down Melymbrosia's review back when it was released. It's one of the most insightful ones I ever read. She also wrote a great story about one of the characters.
no subject
Date: 2003-12-27 11:22 am (UTC)Stargate has great visuals and accomplishes a lot with a relatively small budget. I liked that too.
As for ET... well, I find most Spielberg films too sentimental. This is one of them. It's well done, well produced, well everything - I just don't enjoy it. I like Schindler's List a lot better.
Oh well, de gustibus...
I do, however, fully agree, Selenak, with your take on the extended version of The Two Towers. MUCH better than the cinema version. Scenes that are desperately needed to hold LotR1 and 3 together. :-)
I beg to differ
Date: 2003-12-27 12:13 pm (UTC)Patriot hate comes from more than the embarassing over the top how-many-times-can-he-put-the-flagg-in-a-frame-nationalism. Emmerich copied some shots from Hitlerjunge Quex, down to the exact position of the actors and camera frame, and considering he went to the Hochschule für Fernsehen und Film in Munich which I happen to know the schedule of classes of (and they include Nazi propaganda movies), I don't think it was unintentional. Also, the simplification into "British=EVIL" (in Hitlerjunge Quex, their role was fulfilled by the communists), the utter lack of more-dimensional characters, Mel Gibson's excepted, the evasion of even the slightest bit of historical truth by letting him pay his slaves, err, excuse me, black workers... argh.
Schindler's List is a masterpiece (and has one one the most unusual opening sequences with Oscar Schindler putting on his golden party emblem, such a slap in the face for easy expectations) but I think you can't compare it with E.T. anymore than you can compare apples with oranges. It would be like accusing, say, Bewitched, Bothered and Bewildered for not being The Body. Completely different episodes.
Good to know you like the EE of The Two Towers.*g*
Re: I beg to differ
Date: 2003-12-27 12:38 pm (UTC)Completely agree, and your analogy to BBB and The Body is perfect. Schindler's List is a masterpiece of human drama, tragedy and rebirth. But E.T. is no less a masterpiece, IMO, although it is a masterpiece of children's literature/fantasy. Same way BBB is an absolutely brilliant, classic masterpiece of a Buffy episode, just like The Body, and shouldn't be compared unfavorably to that episode just because it doesn't have as weighty a subject matter. E.T. could be compared to Spielberg's other children's fantasies, for example, and come out as, IMO, his best one, though, just as BBB continues to remain one of Buffy's top comedic episodes.
no subject
Date: 2003-12-28 03:50 pm (UTC)you're most welcome
Date: 2003-12-28 11:52 pm (UTC)Good story!