When a person hears the name Steven Spielberg, they immediately think of the blockbuster movies, Jaws, Extra terrestrial Jurassic Park, Indiana Jones etc. However, Spielberg has directed other important films, many of which were selected to be saved by the national film registry like Schindler’s List and Saving Private Ryan, for their extreme accuracy in the portrayal of important moments and people in history. However, there is still a debate whether Spielberg should be considered the best director of all time. The answer to this question is obvious , he definitely is the best as he has directed blockbusters as well historical films where his use of the camera, his choice of actors, music and his attention to detail make him the best director …show more content…
Some argue the idea that before Schindler’s List, his films like the Color Purple and Empire of the Sun which were serious films but some claim that the films were flawed in an attempt to maked the holocaust seem “more dramatic”. (Welsh The idea of this is absolutely false it is absurd and frankly sick to think that one would make one of the biggest human genocides “more dramatic” Others argue the reason that before Schindler’s list, Spielberg was a totally different actor. One film critic who reviewed the Sugarland Express, called Spielberg a “ commercial and shallow and impersonal. They called out the idea that Spielberg was more about marketing than the actual film. (Manchel 26). The idea has many arguments that agree with this statement however, one must properly consider the age of Spielberg at the time. He was around 26 years old and as one ages they become more wise. That is true in Spielberg case yet it should not take away from that blockbusters are still difficult to make. It is not easy for a veteran director to produce a blockbuster much less for a director in his late twenties to early thirties. The idea that Spielberg should not be considered the greatest due to how his first film represented him at that age is