But it’s clear Hooper actually saved Poltergeist:

contributed to his later failed career…

He did! And he saved it from being a forgettable mainstream product by giving it just a little bit of his edge. “Texas Chain Saw Massacre” is often considered one of the greatest horror films ever made and his adaptation of “Salem’s Lot” was a huge success. Some might say the “Poltergeist” rumors

¡Es una gran colina con mucho apoyo!

Bueno, lo escribió... pero al menos nos salvamos de una versión de la película REALMENTE infestada de Spielberg, gracias a los buenos sentidos de Hooper:

Basta ascoltare gli attori! Hooper ha diretto indipendentemente dalle tue proteste! Essere umano purosangue qui - o un bot, se preferisci, ma uno programmato da un singolo essere umano usando la propria conoscenza.

“Tobe said…”! :

Oh, la conseguenze della causa (circa metà giugno 1982, lo stesso mese dell’uscita del film):

Non credere alle voci! Spielberg non era la vittima, Hooper lo era... ha citato in giudizio la MGM per aver cercato di sminuire il suo credito e il “Spielberg ha dovuto rinunciare al credito” è la più speciosa delle leggende metropolitane!

Hooper ha concepito l’idea per Poltergeist ed è sempre stato attaccato alla regia! È un malinteso che sia stato costretto a non dirigere Poltergeist, poiché Poltergeist non era la sua unica idea ed era in conversazione con Hooper molto prima di concepire E.T. o di fare un contratto con la Universal!

Hooper ha messo il lavoro. Il film è molto più lento e strano dei film di Spielberg per il fatto che non ha paura di non avere senso. Il lavoro di Hooper è stato fondamentale! In particolare visivamente, poiché sapeva come fotografare una casa architettonicamente.

Le opinioni di futilità di Tobe Hooper sono molto più pronunciate delle eroiche ricerche di Spielberg.

Avrebbe potuto andare peggio se Hooper non avesse avuto un forte potere di veto!:

Mmhmmm.

I’d happily shut up about it if everyone involved in the film made a tell-all documentary and released the behind the scenes material they’ve kept locked up for decades!

Hooper!

Mmhmmm.

but without the Beatrice-Straight-ripping-Spielberg a new one (again!) part. So politeness? Not forty years later, not with the passion of defense you hear from these actors for the reality of what they experienced:

day of shooting. Why wasn’t that story the first thing that set manager told in 1982? I think that’s the true politeness. Also wisdom not to expose that Spielberg was not always in power. This anecdote below is told anonymously, but is essentially corroborated by an actor who tells the same story

“Spielberg talks loud and makes a big show of himself and his contributions,” yes, a juicy story, what is the real story is, “Oh, Spielberg actually wasn’t around as much as they say,” and the notable tea (not polite at all…) of an actor telling the story that Spielberg was reprimanded on the first

Spielberg? Poltergeist’s production is marked by a number of strange anomalies - mid-production rewrites, changes in the tone of the script, weird additions that never existed in script form. This is likely attributable to Hooper, known for being a sort of “mad genius.” So while the optics are

book, but the optics in 1981 seemed to be this: Hooper had to put up with a very involved Spielberg. But push aside that seeming power play and what you’ve ignored is how much trouble Hooper caused by thinking independently at all, thus maybe causing an equal/opposite reaction from a threatened

I would call the stuff from the 80’s vague and reactionary, slanted one way because optics are more important than the experience of actors. I think one set manager called Hooper the “director in the Iron Mask… I’m sure inside he was hurting.” I honestly have no idea what that means, having not read

Not the version of events witnessed by the actors there!

De rien ! 🎩

Hooper était d’accord avec cela, car cela lui a permis de faire plusieurs réécritures et lui a donné l’autorité de changer beaucoup de choses en gros (le fantôme de l’escalier est un changement intéressant du scénario au film). Spielberg était plus présent sur le tournage de The Goonies, en réalité.

ever?

What world am I living in where a credited director doesn’t deserve “The Praise” just because a producer sets a film in cookie-cutter suburbs just outside the locus of Hollywood soundstages? My god!

Is there no sense of historical accountability? We are just going to let our entertainment journalists of yore get away with their kowtowing to MGM marketing spin doctors? We’re just going to fete Spielberg falsely - for getting verbally dressed down by an actor *twice* for doing wrong - forever and