67 Comments
Mar 10, 2023Liked by Roy Edroso

Thanks, Roy. I also have traditionally found Spielberg too schmaltzy, even though many of his movies were a lot of fun. But I’ve mellowed and grown slightly less cynical about his oeuvre over time, and that frees me up to enjoy his sheer technical skill much more than I used to do.

Expand full comment
Mar 10, 2023·edited Mar 10, 2023Liked by Roy Edroso

Dude can sure make a movie. Kind of like how Springsteen can sure write a song.

The classics and near classics start to run together after 20 or so.

Then again, any film with cameo of David Lynch as John Ford just has to be something special, if just for that.

Expand full comment

Hey Roy- this didn't get mailed out. I had to follow the Rebid link.

Expand full comment
Mar 10, 2023Liked by Roy Edroso

I really appreciate these reviews. Haven't seen this one, but I have a problem with these kinds of fictionalized semi-autobiographical stories generally -- like, what's the point? This one, with all the Spielberg interviews and NY Times articles about what's true or not*, is especially irksome. Why is the main character named "Sam" instead of "Stephen"? How "semi" autobiographical is it? Are we watching it to be inspired by the Spielberg origin story or some other one? At what point is dramatic license just an excuse for "loosely based on a true story that wasn't good enough on its own but we'll pretend it is so you'll watch it?"

"A Song to Remember" may have been typical Hollywood schmaltz but at least the main character was named "Chopin".

*https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/23/movies/the-fabelmans-steven-spielberg-facts.html

Expand full comment
Mar 10, 2023Liked by Roy Edroso

Hollywood movie bios of famous people always had the scene where someone says, "Wise up, you'll never make it kid!" (I think it might have been a requirement in the Hayes Code.) Couldn't tell from your review if this movie has that. Did no one tell Young Spielberg there's good, steady work to be had at the Post Office?

Expand full comment
Mar 10, 2023Liked by Roy Edroso

I used to read Armond White's pieces in the old New York Press. Smart, yes, and occasionally thought-provoling. But he was always kinda nuts.

Expand full comment

There are a few Spielberg movies I haven't seen (this is one of them). "Jaws" has to be considered a classic, if only in its genre. That one with McCloud vs. the truck was pretty good too! And that Columbo episode. And that fucking insane scene where the T-Rex is trying to get at the kids in the car (umm, the first one!). "Schindler's List" got me to think about "art" itself (I mean, can anyone really say they "loved" that movie; like, we don't really have the language to describe the portrayal of something. truly horrific). Anyway, as a fan of movies, I'll watch anything Spielberg makes

Expand full comment

I found it entertaining and well-made. I don’t care who made it, or how much was historically accurate, and have no thoughts about how it fits into any ouvre, so to me it was just a film about a kid with an obsessive and some of the key moments that shaped where the obsession would take him. Not the greatest or most meaningful movie ever, but I found it entertaining and well-made, and that’s enough.

Though I would like to see a whole movie with David Lynch as John Ford, so maybe it ended where it really should have started.

Expand full comment
Mar 10, 2023Liked by Roy Edroso

True film criticism is dead.

https://twitter.com/joerussotweets/status/1633547018877665280

Expand full comment
Mar 10, 2023·edited Mar 10, 2023Liked by Roy Edroso

Favorites?

First time through for Raiders of the Lst Ark. I saw it in a big theatre with premium sound. I was overwhelmed.

I saw 1941 at the drive - in with some beers. We had a great time

I think people misunderstood it .It was a great big dumb movie with too much going on. Like how " It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World was big and dumb and not really very good but unforgettable nonetheless.

Expand full comment
Mar 10, 2023Liked by Roy Edroso

My wife wanted to see this more than I did. I had many of the same takes as Roy presents here, until the very, very end. Spielberg breaks the 4th wall in the last shot. Yes, it's jokey. But it also explained everything I just saw and made me more sympathetic to the movie itself.

Of course... all of what I thought about The Film is just that. It's a Thing made by Steven Spielberg. It's purely a Creation made by That Particular Guy. It cannot be anything other than that. Just like the film of the train set in the beginning. It's all just a vision put together with mechanical equipment and lights that tells the viewer a story from a specific point of view. It's the only time I can remember Spielberg going Meta, and it made me appreciate it a bit more than I did in the previous two hours. Does that mean I loved all the corn and ham presented to me? Well, it made me like it a little more.

Expand full comment
Mar 10, 2023Liked by Roy Edroso

Three airplane movies in 18 hours, all about widowed old men seeing or admitting the light, with or without dementia. “The Judge,” with Robert Duvall and “Is Anyone There?” and “Mr. Morgan’s Last Love” with Michael Caine. Reaction: I’m not as demented or out of shape as those characters but Duvall and Caine are great actors.

Expand full comment
Mar 10, 2023Liked by Roy Edroso

Forgot to mention how much I liked Cinema vanité as a title, pretty damn clever. Stick with it, kid, you may have a future in this writin' business. Now get the fuck outta my office [chomps on cigar]

Expand full comment

Here is where I get to say that I always marvel at Spielberg's ability--genius, if you ask me--at placing the camera for a shot. From Jaws on. I think I read somewhere that, when filming the Omaha Beach opening of Saving Private Ryan, he (and the cinematographer, I assume) just roved around the beach, improvising set-ups on the fly. I'm, like, yikes.

Expand full comment
Mar 10, 2023Liked by Roy Edroso

My spidey sense tingled big time when I first heard about The Fabelmans. "Uh oh, aging guy feels the need to document his childhood as a wonderland of opportunity he didn't recognize at the time, and overcomes many obstacles to fulfill his destiny". Sounds like I nailed it. The first and last thing everyone says about Spielberg is what a brilliant technician he is, aka "the guy sure knows how to make a movie", which should be the Wikipedia entry for damning with faint praise. That praise boils down to "that guy sure knows how to manipulate our emotions", and it's more than a little unfair to ask to what end. What's the point of a song, a story, a dance, a statue? Spielberg may he the most American of all filmmakers, a consummate craftsman with nothing more to say than look how big, dumb, romantic and (mostly) harmless we all are. It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World after all.

Expand full comment
Mar 10, 2023Liked by Roy Edroso

i think "Fabelmans" is only the second-best Spielberg movie of the year...the best is the un-nominated and slightly under-appreciated "Nope," in which Jordan Peele plays with some of same tricks young Sammy learns in "Fabelmans." but overall i enjoyed "fabelmans" and particularly Spielberg's ability to tell and show at the same time. the filmcraft is great. the model train crash sequences are genuinely riveting even though we know they're just toys, and that brings us into Sammy's POV; Sammy describes how showing a character's facial reaction tells you about what they're seeing more powerfully than showing it would, and then later we see Mitzi's response to Sammy's closet-screened footage as an illustration of the technique that's also genuinely moving. the guy knows how to light, compose, and edit a sequence to pull you in moment by moment, even if the movie as a whole is a little loose and shaggy.

though maybe i'm just an extra-easy mark for Spielberg's schtick from having rewatched the perfect "Jurassic Park" the day before i watched "Fabelmans."

Expand full comment