I guess I was hoping you would have an argument to make about Spielberg’s filmography, since “he hasn’t done anything good since Temple of Doom” is a nutty statement to me. I don’t see how you could hold that opinion, and I was asking for you to explain what it was about his post-1984 output that rubbed you the wrong way, in the hopes of possibly unlocking another angle by which to evaluate these movies.
However, based upon your statement that you’re unsure of how to explain your opinion, I’m thinking I was barking up the wrong tree for that sort of discussion. If you don’t engage with film criticism in that way, we’ll just be talking past one another, I fear.
I guess I was hoping you would have an argument to make about Spielberg’s filmography, since “he hasn’t done anything good since Temple of Doom” is a nutty statement to me. I don’t see how you could hold that opinion, and I was asking for you to explain what it was about his post-1984 output that rubbed you the wrong way, in the hopes of possibly unlocking another angle by which to evaluate these movies.
However, based upon your statement that you’re unsure of how to explain your opinion, I’m thinking I was barking up the wrong tree for that sort of discussion. If you don’t engage with film criticism in that way, we’ll just be talking past one another, I fear.
The movies were boring, not interesting and unoriginal?