Minority Report (2002)

The short story by Philip Dick has no references to a lost daughter and son and there is also no father figure (whether good or treacherous) in the form of Lamar Burgess. Spielberg has once again created a film in which the issue of the longed for mother (as well as child in this version) is placed at odds with and finally subverted by an uncaring and dishonest evil father figure. It is interesting to note that it is the female figure that has the ability to create and the father literally has to kill the mother in order to control the child’s gift. Spielberg has added so many levels dealing with the family that are not found in the original story – so many that the two stories are barely recognizable as similar. In Spielberg’s modern take on Oedipus we are shown a father missing a son (both with similar names as John and Sean have similar origins), a mother missing a daughter (Anne and Agatha also with similar origins), true brothers (the twins) and symbolic ones (John and Danny Witner), good mothers (Anne) and monstrous mothers (Iris) that is can be argued that the screenplay has more to do with the story of Oedipus and the struggle of the child between the powerful forces of the mother and father than it does to Dick’s original story. As in many Spielberg films, it is the female that drives the story and it is the father that threatens to destroy the creative power. Spielberg again seems to be working through issues from his childhood, perhaps the scars he still feels from his father’s abandonment and the struggle for dominance between the maternal and paternal that resulted. The father figures in his films are typically disinterested (A.I.), failing at their role as father (Close Encounters), lacking feeling (Empire of the Sun), immoral (Minority Report) or gone (as for Elliot in E.T. and the boy/man Indian Jones). The mothers can be at times too dominant (Sugerland Express) or even monstrous (Minority Report) but it is typically the female that is responsible for the narrative (Marion becomes the true Ark, the concern for Ryan’s mother is what starts the quest to get him home, Agatha longs for her mother and shows John her vision). It is when the male tries to dominant and control this art (where Agatha’s pre-visions or the chaos that transpires when nature introduces males into the female only world of The Lost World). Perhaps much of Spielberg’s popularity is due not only to his technical skills, but his constant return to this struggle between the maternal and paternal, as it is something we all struggle with, whether consciously or unconsciously at times.

Artificial Intelligence: A.I. (2001)

In the story of Oedipus, the main character pokes out his eyes when he learns that he has killed his father, slept with his mother, and fathered children with her. In A.I., David cuts his mother’s eye with scissors he was using to obtain her hair (which coincidently holds her DNA – the building blocks for reproduction). When physically assaulted by his father as to why he did this, David replies he wanted his mother to love him. This scene is set in motion by David’s “real brother” who tricks him in to promising to obtain her hair and with the promise the Monica will love him if he is successful. It is not until David physically touches the bed (the father’s domain) that Monica is startled and nearly loses her eye. Spielberg has twisted the Oedipus story so that the son almost stabs his mother’s eye less due to the fact the son wishes to replace the father, but because he wishes her to love him as much as, if not more, than her biological son - echoing the familiar motif that one sometimes needs to be blinded before they can truly see. The wish fulfillment of this desire is granted at the end of the film, but Monica and David’s positions have changed – she is not the replicant and David is the special or unique individual. It is no surprise that the wish fulfilled day begins and ends on the mother’s bed. Spielberg again provided a story driven by the desire for the mother, where the main character struggles through many obstacles for her approval, where the father is distant and threatening, and where the final images (which appear as film or dreams) would not have been possible without the muse of the mother.

Saving Private Ryan (1998)

The first twenty minutes of this film are mind blowing. Spielberg shows you visions both terrifying and sublime. It is interesting that he chooses to start the film concentrating on the eyes of the veteran at the grave (which turns out to be Private Ryan) then matches it only a few scenes later with the eyes of Captain John Miller. When the film ends and you realize that Ryan's remembrances of the storming of the beach could not have been first hand, rather stories that were told to him (as the young Spielberg was told war stories by his father). Perhaps this is simply a conceit to surprise the audience, but it is also likely that Spielberg was commenting on how memory is not completely reliable and can never capture the essence of an event or life. The plot of having a group of soldiers risk their lives on a mission to bring one soldier back to his mom won't lose her last son is of course ridiculous and is just too much of a hurdle to get over and keeps this film form being a masterpiece. I was surprised however that even given this ridiculous plot device the film was still very powerful.

Schindler’s List

I feel I have to first state that I think this is a powerful film and one that should have been made given the ignorance of the majority of people regarding the Holocaust. However, I do not view Schindler’s List as a film that focuses primarily on the Holocaust and it is perhaps this reason that I do not agree with the many detractors of this film. I see the film focusing on the character of Oscar Schindler and his development as a human being. The movie is fascinating as it explores a human being that winds up doing great acts, yet a man that at least initially lacks any moral center. As we witness Itzhak Stern guide Schindler on his path to becoming a compassionate human being, the images of the Holocaust are moving, but they do come close to representing the Holocaust itself. The fact that none of the characters we come to know lose their lives, the overall positive feeling of the film (and one can perhaps fault Spielberg for making his film sometimes too beautiful for the subject matter), the need for him to find an escape for his persecuted characters, and his betrayal of his exploration of an imperfect main character (having Schindler break down and cry wishing he had spent more money) do give ammunition to his critics. The scene where the Jewish woman and children are placed into what we think are gas chambers, only to find (to the characters’ relief and ours) it is only a shower, is aggravating. Spielberg it seems can not go that far into the darkness and we perhaps subconsciously are relieved he has provided an escape. For millions of people however, there was no escape and providing one for a Hollywood production may ultimately sell more tickets, but fails to help us grasp the horror that ended so many lives.

However, if you acknowledge that no film or work of art can ever represent the Holocaust, then the moments and images Spielberg does capture are powerful and add to the main focus of the film, which is the character of Oscar Schindler. On that level, had Spielberg not chosen to have Schindler break down out of character at the end of the film, but instead left him the enigma he was (perhaps even suggesting he could have been doing this as he knew Germany was losing the war), the character of Oscar Schindler would have gone down as one of the most interesting in films. In the end however, Spielberg has given us a fascinating character portrayal and glimpses of some of the atrocities. Merely for this and the fact he helped bring awareness to the subject, he succeeded and must be commended.

I would also argue that even with the failing on the part of Spielberg to hold true to the character of Oscar Schindler due to his apparent constant need for melodrama in his characters and feel good endings to his movies, the character of Oscar Schindler that existed up until the last few moments of the film is so fascinating, that it still manages to rise to the level of brilliance. Few people could have even dared to make Schindler’s List into a movie and Spielberg’s masterpiece is flawed, but I can’t help but admire him for what he was able to accomplish.

Jurassic Park (1993)

I found it interesting that Spielberg called Jurassic Park "a sequel to Jaws on land" as Spielberg did seam to be throwing in references to many of his most successful movies - the raptors of course similar to the shark of Jaws, but Alan Grant appears to be an aging Indiana Jones (again more interested in the past than those around him) and the scene in which Alan Grant and Tim flee from a jeep (which looks like it is driving down a tree to attack them) brings to mind the Truck in Duel. The movie is one of my favorite Spielberg films for its sheer pleasure of watching dinosaurs brought to life so spectacularly (though later versions would have better affects, they lacked the superior writing and acting of the original) and eyeing humans as their new favorite meal. Spielberg's playfulness while commentating on merchandising and Disneyland (w/ a Disneyland-like theme park where the pirates of the Caribbean breaking down can result in the visitors being eaten)

It is interesting to note that the character of Alan Grant did not have the initial discomfort around children that Spielberg added to the film. Again, Spielberg shows us a male father figure that lacks basic father skills. The character of Ian Malcolm is an absentee father that spends most of his time hitting on the mother figure of Ellie Sattler. However, over the course of the film Alan loses his uncaring attitude (his first encounter with a child borders on contempt) towards children to a protective and caring father figure.

Empire of the Sun

Another film with a family torn apart – this time by war. I didn’t enjoy this film as much as I thought I would (I think Hope and Glory is a better picture along the same lines) and I was actually struck by how the film didn’t stand out as a Spielberg production – not so much control of the audience through the placement of the camera, less over sentimentality than you would normally expect from Spielberg (especially given the subject matter) and none of the out of place or strained humor that sometimes detaches you from his stories. Perhaps the greatest obstacle was the character of Jamie/Jim himself. He was just too self-centered and unaware of the suffering of those around him for me to really care for his character. A few interesting scenes though - sexuality is at least referred to (uncommon in a Spielberg film) while the boy watches the couple from his makeshift room, the flash of the atomic bomb being mistake for a soul ascending (but could he have seen the bombs in Japan from where he was?) and the mother and father’s response when they are reunited with Jamie (the father at first walks right by him as if he no longer recognizes his son and later only the mother embraces Jamie – the father only able to stand by uncomfortably witnessing this show of emotion even though they have been separate by years of hardships). We come to see flying equated with freedom, however, there is very little freedom in the film – it feels stifling and depressing most of the time. Even Jamie’s rising above the stupidity of war and not seeing the world as black or white, good or evil, but seeing the honorable characters of the flyers and soldiers on both sides trapped in a war they did not choose, but will fight till their deaths was hard to embrace at times – and we too may wish to remind him that rooting for the enemy to be glorious may work fine in a comic book or the dreams of a child, but have no place in the real world where people are suffering and dying.

The Color Purple

In The Color Purple we watch as Celie and Nettie devise a way of overcoming Mister’s attempt to keep them apart. Common in Spielberg’s films, they are seen though an open doorway (initially as shadows in an off screen space but then Nettie breaks into the on screen space behind the doorway). As the scene progresses, the camera pulls back and we realize that we have been eavesdropping on the two young women from the perspective of Mister. Spielberg has taken us from being a co-conspirator with the young women to becoming their oppressor merely by the use of his camera to establish an off-screen presence. It is perhaps normal to assume an omniscient perspective when we peer through a doorway, but Spielberg continually plays on our assumptions and jolts us at times as we realize we are standing in the place of the character we most revile or fear. Spielberg also plays on distorting our environment by not always letting us know where we are. As the older Celie reads her sister’s letters, we become aware that the sun she is looking at is actually in the sky above her sister in Africa and then before we know it, Mister has stepped in front of it, transporting us back to Celie. The technique not only compacts the images and ideas on the screen, but adds a unity to the characters and to the theme of the story. This technique may be seen as too artful for some, taking the viewer out of the story for a moment as they struggle to get their bearings and also marvel at the director’s skill, but it does add to the poetic unity of the whole as the sisters stories intertwine.