Re: He is Risen

In article <2008032616255716807-kurt@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
Kurt Busiek  <kurt@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>On 2008-03-26 15:36:21 -0700, Sea Wasp <seawaspObvious@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
said:
>
>
>I think it's arguable either way.  They've both got Indiana Jones on 
>their side, which feels more Lucas-y than Spielberg-y.  But if you 
>stack up CE3K, E.T., POLTERGEIST, GREMLINS, GOONIES, JURASSIC PARK and 
>such up against the STAR WARS canon, LABYRINTH, HOWARD THE DUCK, WILLOW 
>and that crowd, you get Lucas having a very strong but concentrated 
>effect (Star Wars and Indy) while Spielberg has more varied successes.  
>Spielberg has been hugely influential as a director and a producer; 
>Lucas is hugely influential as a producer.  Lucas may have spawned more 
>attempts to grab his particular brass ring (Disney's THE BLACK HOLE, 
>for instance, is an attempt to do Lucas), while Spielberg, along with 
>Kennedy/Marshall, spawned Chris Columbus, Robert Zemeckis and others.
>
>Ultimately, it's gonna depend on what you value.  Lucas has had two 
>shatteringly-successful franchises that have made him enormously 
>wealthy and which have spawned lots of imitations and helped blow the 
>doors open for SFX spectacle in Holloywood.  Spielberg has has 
>astoundingly successful movies that mave made him wealthy, spawned lots 
>of spiritual and creative follow-ons and also helped blow the doors 
>open for SFX spectacle of a different flavor in Hollywood.


Lucas is, also, largely responsible for the nostalgia wave that hit in the

1970's through American Graffiti. While things like Happy Days and Grease 
were already around (well, I assume Happy Days. I know Grease was.) when 
it came out, American Graffiti really caused the nostalgia movement to 
take off.

-- 
The All-New, All-Different Howling Curmudgeons!
http://www.whiterose.org/howlingcurmudgeons