tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12380553.post15534156290790202..comments2024-03-28T14:49:36.133-04:00Comments on John Kenneth Muir's Reflections on Cult Movies and Classic TV: The Films of 1982: E.T. The Extra-TerrestrialJohn Kenneth Muirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15629979615332893780noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12380553.post-75988437889985397502012-02-02T15:05:14.570-05:002012-02-02T15:05:14.570-05:00John,
Thanks for the reply. I'm normally not ...John,<br /><br />Thanks for the reply. I'm normally not so effusive, especially with regard to person stuff like this, but reading your review really got it welling up again.<br /><br />You're quite correct about the reasons for my feelings toward <i>E.T.</i> I don't dislike the film at all. Having seen it only once (at age 10), I really can't say one way or the other what I think of it <i>as a film</i>. My memory of it is too colored by everything else that was happening at that time. It ripped me up because it was showing me all the things I wanted and wished for and <i>needed</i> at the time but could never have. I couldn't bear to let it touch the places it was reaching for. <br /><br />I'm a HUGE fan of Steven Spielberg (<i>Close Encounters</i> may well be my favorite film of all time), so <i>E.T.</i> has always been unique among his work for me as "The One I Can't Watch."<br /><br />I will say that I think this film is one of those ultra-rare "once in a 100 years" cultural phenomena that truly speaks to something elemental within <i>all</i> people. This may go some way in explaining the strength of my own (and others') reaction to it. Has there been any other film since '82 that's affected audiences quite so deeply? Offhand I can't think of one. Now <i>that's</i> an achievement!<br /><br />-- KenCount Zerohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15711973144626199945noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12380553.post-26842007245746147032012-02-01T19:45:50.503-05:002012-02-01T19:45:50.503-05:00Count Zero,
I'm glad you wrote to share your ...Count Zero,<br /><br />I'm glad you wrote to share your story, and I wish I had something smarter or more insightful to offer in response. <br /><br />I do know that Steven Spielberg actually had a childhood very much like the one you describe in your comment, and that many of his films represent a kind of working through of those issues.<br /><br />I think you see it yourself, by your comment, but it's not that you don't like E.T....it's that the movie made you confront some serious issues in your own life, and worse, it did so when you were still young and not really able to enunciate or understand it all.<br /><br />As you say, you know it changed you, but you weren't sure why.<br /><br />I don't want to say you should revisit the film now, because that may or may not be the right thing to do. You have very personal feelings about the film, and it hits close to home for you. As a cinematic work of art, I think the film is very strong, but I can only suspect that if I had your perspective about it, I too would feel bothered or unsettled by it.<br /><br />Thank you for sharing your thoughts and experience with the film.<br /><br />best,<br />JohnJohn Kenneth Muirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15629979615332893780noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12380553.post-77875658850175182182012-02-01T14:38:27.455-05:002012-02-01T14:38:27.455-05:00This is probably going to sound weird, but this ha...This is probably going to sound weird, but this has been simmering on the back burner for decades... <br /><br />I was 10 years old when E.T. hit and it was the most devastating cinematic experience of my life. And not in a "good" way. <br /><br />You see, I identified with Elliott to a, perhaps, unhealthy degree. My parents, though not technically divorced, were as close to separated as you can get and still claim you're married. My dad was never around (traveling, always traveling) and my mom was deeply bitter about it. He was a transient we'd see only briefly, who'd stay just long enough to get in another shouting match with my mom then high-tail it out again. <br />My mom did the best she could for my two brothers and me, but there was never much real happiness, just a sort of resigned acceptance. But, at 10, I was able to distract myself most of the time and wouldn't have considered our lives particularly unusual or especially unhappy. I guess it never occurred to me to examine things too closely.<br /><br />Then E.T. landed. It was saying things that I wasn't prepared to deal with. It showed me a reflection of my own home life that hit me like a ton of bricks. I think that movie was the catalyst for my first ever bout with major depression. I was a different person after seeing it. Where other kids came away tearful <br />but happy, I was in a fog of resentment and anger. But, at 10, I had no way to verbalize this except to declare to one and all that I absolutely HATED that movie. I felt assaulted, violated, and deeply, inconsolably sad. The <br />emotions of Spielberg's tale hit way too close to home. Of course, all I knew was that I felt different now. I couldn't begin to understand what had happened or why. I just knew that I had undergone a dark and monumental internal shift.<br /><br />Anyway... not sure why I'm writing this except to say that no other movie (before or since) has affected me anywhere near so strongly. Your review brought it all up again, as I've steadfastly avoided the film since 1982. I couldn't bear to face it again, even much later on video and DVD. Too much baggage. <br /><br />I guess when (or if) it ever appears on Blu-ray, I'll finally sit down and see what happens. I'm turning 40 this year, so I guess it's about time!Count Zerohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15711973144626199945noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12380553.post-69561853321014600802012-01-10T09:06:43.073-05:002012-01-10T09:06:43.073-05:00Hi J.D.!
Thank you for your excellent comment. L...Hi J.D.!<br /><br />Thank you for your excellent comment. Like I said in regards to Cannon, I can definitely see and get behind the point being made. I prefer Poltergeist.<br /><br />I can't say I prefer Explorers, though I never watched it again after my theatrical viewing in 1985. I remember acute disappointment in the climax (after a great start), as all the universe was reduced to goofy aliens who like watching human sitcoms. I need to watch the film again, but that was my response was a fifteen year old!<br /><br />Excellent comment!<br /><br />best,<br />JohnJohn Kenneth Muirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15629979615332893780noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12380553.post-34194467354588836452012-01-09T11:18:05.050-05:002012-01-09T11:18:05.050-05:00I have to say I'm with Cannon on this one. I d...I have to say I'm with Cannon on this one. I do respect and appreciate E.T.'s technical merits but the film itself doesn't do much for me. I remember enjoying it as a kid when I first saw it but having caught up with it again a few years ago it has not aged well with me while other Spielberg films (JAWS, CLOSE ENCOUNTERS) have. Go figure. I've always felt that Joe Dante was a much better director in dealing with children characters within the science fiction and fantasy genres. For me personally, I prefer EXPLORERS over ET.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08164105442273577128noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12380553.post-39977692388392971842012-01-07T12:00:37.606-05:002012-01-07T12:00:37.606-05:00Cannon:
I had just finished typing my responses t...Cannon:<br /><br />I had just finished typing my responses to the earlier comments and then saw your excellent comment! <br /><br />My god, I love you. Can I just say that? <br /><br />Your comment is extremely thoughtful and extremely balanced. And on some level, I agree with you. I think E.T. is an extraordinary film, but personally speaking I too prefer Poltergeist. We are of the same mind on that preference.<br /><br />And yet, I am enamored of E.T.'s technical brilliance and the excavation of a child's inner life. I think it's magnificent, a masterpiece. And yet, yes, I do prefer Poltergeist. I've watched E.T. probably three times since 1982. I've watched Poltergeist probably a dozen or so times. That film scares the heck out of me every time...<br /><br />Thank you for saying it well, and for presenting an affirmative but also well-balanced view of the film!<br /><br />best,<br />JohnJohn Kenneth Muirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15629979615332893780noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12380553.post-63837257444411824072012-01-07T11:50:05.675-05:002012-01-07T11:50:05.675-05:00Hi everyone, great comments here on my first "...Hi everyone, great comments here on my first "films of 1982" feature (on E.T. The Extra Terrestrial).<br /><br />Neal: You're absolutely right about E.T. and the lack of pre-hype back in the day. Wasn't there some kind of kerfuffle between Spielberg and Starlog over the movie, and coverage of it? Regardless, the final film speaks for itself. E.T. is, as you say, a masterpiece.<br /><br />Le0pard13: It's wonderful that you bring up the weird yin and yang of 1982: it gave us both Spielberg's E.T. and Carpenter's The Thing (and both from Universal, right?) You couldn't ask for better "mirror reflections" in terms of an alien-on-earth movie-going experience. As you know, I'm a huge fan of The Thing...I think Carpenter's movie is one of the best ever made. E.T. is also a masterpiece...and what a double feature they'd make.<br /><br />I also share your anger with the Academy over its failure to recognize E.T....for Gandhi. I remember being spitting mad that year during the Oscars. Hollywood has this awful tendency to reward "prestige" projects like Gandhi and deride sci-fi, fantasy and horror. This is a clear cut case of that. Gandhi was fine. E.T. was outstanding. The wrong film won!<br /><br />Hi Jamie: I read that interview too, and was glad to see that Spielberg is rejecting these retro-active "improvements" (with CGI) that seem all the rage, especially with George Lucas. Films are a product of their times -- for better or worse -- and it is a fool's game to try to update them and erase the original context. Doing so only creates a mish-mash (example a: Lucas's director's cut of THX-113, now with CGI scorpions!!)<br /><br />best to all,<br />JohnJohn Kenneth Muirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15629979615332893780noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12380553.post-21702732334274309592012-01-07T11:45:38.510-05:002012-01-07T11:45:38.510-05:00I like E.T. Extra Terrestrial, I really do, but it...I like <b>E.T. Extra Terrestrial</b>, I really do, but it’s not for me. I know that doesn’t make sense, but give me a moment to try and connect the pieces. I appreciate <b>E.T.</b> for its technical craft. I appreciate the visual collaboration between Spielberg and DP Allen Daviau; that this was Spielberg’s first feature film shot in 1.85:1 aspect ratio, and the intentions for which are quite clear: the POV world of a child is vertically declined, tall, and in a way said aspect ratio further accentuates indoor environs as only a child would see it ...an <i>inner world</i>. <br /><br />Note that the walk-in-closet that connects Elliot’s room with Gertie’s is the film’s most secret, intimate place. When the three of them – Elliot, Gertie and Michael – huddle together and look upon E.T., hiding amongst stuffed animals, the specific framing brings them (emotionally) closer to the audience in such a way that could never be achieved anamorphically. We share this moment of discovery with these kids at a warmly physical level, as if we were actually in the room huddled along next to them. The framing also allows visible the octagon shaped, flower decorated, stained glass window, which, along with a single dim lamp, bathes the scene in an amniotic, womb-like glow. The technical, aesthetic choices of this scene connect with the audience so intuitively, so subconsciously, that they become perfectly seamless with the emotional context of the characters.<br /> <br />This scene, and the way its setting and circumstances are expressed cinematically, is but one example of many throughout the film. The direction is superb. The musical score is superb. The acting and casting is superb. Henry Thomas delivers a nakedly honest performance as a boy of all boys and, begrudgingly, I am forced to admit that 7-yearold Drew Barrymore is the most shamelessly adorable child-screen presence in the history of the medium: <i>“Wwhuh..where’s Mexico?”</i>. Yet Dee Wallace as the lovingly attractive mother is the key means for adult audiences to perceive, and respond to, the children in the film as we would our own. All of these elements work masterfully.<br /><br />Still, I just can’t quite get into <b>E.T.</b> personally. I can recognize how and why others do, but I always watch it with a certain detachment. It’s the excess sentimentality that stops me short. No, I don’t think it cheap or manipulative; it’s something completely sincere from Spielberg. But I simply don’t think it is for everyone. There are moments in <b>E.T.</b>, particularly in the third act, that I consider downright embarrassing--for us, the audience, as we’re beaten into a state of emotional blubbery. It’s just too much for me. By that I mean that at a certain point a switch inside me is flipped: I don’t feel anything, or, I tend to feel less and less as the characters start crying more and more. I began studying the imagery and direction more than feeling it; impressed by what I see, but only technically, objectively. I’m a bigger fan of <b>Poltergeist</b>. Go figure.<br /> <br />In any event, good review. I enjoyed reading it.Cannonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12886860130286869992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12380553.post-63950792213755010652012-01-07T02:02:18.529-05:002012-01-07T02:02:18.529-05:00"E.T." is still a magical film and remai..."E.T." is still a magical film and remains timeless. I'm glad that Spielberg has recently advised watching the original theatrical release rather than his touched-up special edition, because it's really the better of the two. It is truly a masterpiece of filmmakingJamie Heltonhttp://filmverse.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12380553.post-3894106928073046902012-01-06T21:34:42.003-05:002012-01-06T21:34:42.003-05:00B-R-A-V-O, John. An absolutely splendid review of ...B-R-A-V-O, John. An absolutely splendid review of this Spielberg classic. I think you captured the exact magic of this film in your review. And I'm really fond, too, of your recollection of trying to see this one, especially in relation to your age at the time and the circumstances. It's interesting that this film so encapsulates a child's perspective (including wonderment and fears) in its telling. I'd say it is the antithesis in story and scope of John Carpenter's THE THING (also out that year) and its more bleak 'adult' viewpoint toward the introduction of an alien life-form into our midst. Yet, both are utterly fantastic for what they express from their end of the spectrum.<br /><br />I've said it before, and I'll say it again: it still pisses me off royally that 'The Academy' managed to get it so damn wrong for Best Picture that year! Richard Attenborough's 'Gandhi' was a very good biopic of a great man. BUT, in no way, shape or form was it BP that year. Simply, E.T. was it. I'd add, compared with other Spielberg films up for Best Picture, this was solid throughout -- sometimes, Steven's pics, even the great ones, don't start or end as strong as one would expect they should. There, I said it ;-).<br /><br />What a way to start this year, John! Well done. Thanks for this.le0pard13https://www.blogger.com/profile/09421175808461787862noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12380553.post-44789864354691527712012-01-06T11:14:05.585-05:002012-01-06T11:14:05.585-05:00A friend of mine and I went to a sneak preview of ...A friend of mine and I went to a sneak preview of ET a week before the movie officially opened. Our primary reason for going was to see the regular feature afterward which was Warlords of the 21st Century (aka Battletruck). We had no idea we were about to watch a masterpiece (ET that is, not Warlords of the 21st Century).<br /><br />It's funny what little pre-opening marketing they did for movies back then. We knew nothing about the film other than that it was directed by Steven Spielberg. Today, they would've been hyping ET for at least six months prior to opening.Neal Phttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17053148427058126745noreply@blogger.com