Steven Spielberg’s Worst Movie, According To Letterboxd Users

As Steven Spielberg was still trying to find his foundation as a director, he overthrew everything in the low-budget films he made in the early 1970s. Most of these projects were Teleplay, which he tried techniques and improves while it was intended for a feature debut. This dream came true in 1971 for the cult classic “Duel“The frenetic story of a traveling salesman and a nasty truck that encapsulates Spielberg’s raw ability as a storyteller.” The Delel “success put him on the map, but it was not enough to fund the things he wanted to work. Although Spielberg wanted to move gradually with reliability and television films that he had not chosen, but it has not chosen, but it has not chosen that it has chosen, but it has not chosen that he has not selected The period, including the 1973 “Savage”, whose director was not famous at all, but the circumstances forced him to participate anyway.

However, not all Spielberg-based Tele films are made with such a miserable interest. His second television movie, “Something Evil”, is a horror story that appeals to him for the truly suppressing, ominous overlapping. It was a non-contract production, which made it rare to fight something that Spielberg wanted to put in. Here we can see interesting director features, including the tendency to give a significant excitement to speak for themselves, as well as the impressive camera work that emphasizes the evil evil of the ghostly corner of the house. However, it is very incorrect, carrying all the signs of a television movie that was made between the Universal’s several strange jobs (which Spielberg Žongy once). If you squeeze hard, you will find thematic seeds that bloom beautifully on the Tobe Hooper’s “Poltergeist” movie based on the story written by Spielberg himself.

Now it is not surprising that “something bad” does not like a candle for Spielberg’s amazing work (or even his feature for his debut, representing his artistic strengths like this 1972 horror). Is this Spielberg’s worst movie? It’s hard to say, as “1941” exists (alternatively it can also be interpreted as a Madcap masterpiece!)Together with the “BFG”, which seems unusually delusional and trees for the fantasy of Spielbergian children. But we had to ask good people in LostBoxd, “something bad” is the lowest classified feature on the website, by sports out of five 2.5 Despite positive reviews.

If you look closely at what “something bad” requires, it immediately becomes clear that this is an ordinary distress of the house (and there is nothing wrong with it). Recently, married couple Paul (Darren McGavin) and Marjorie (Sandy Dennis), together with their two children, move to an idyllic livestock farm in the Pennsylvanian countryside, where anxiety begins as soon as they have placed on their feet. The nature of the ghost is quite light, full of supernatural gusts of wind and weakening relationships quickly, where Fragile Marjorie is already pushed to her borders. Demonic possession and satanic images were properly appeared because the occult was then furious in haunting -centered films, especially the widespread success of the “Rosemary’s Baby” series. When Marjorie is interested in the fact that Sigil, who apparently engraved to fight evil, is revealed to reveal the true nature of the cattle, which seems to be hiding … something bad (sorry).

The storytelling is clumsy, which Spielberg would end up expertly in just a few years, but “something bad” is undoubtedly an artistic sandbox where most of its core ideas become irrelevant. It is also quite dated in its approach to the genre trops expected of a television movie, which was made on a strict budget that provides Spielberg’s limited freedom to use his vision. Although the film is not nearly as tense as it should have been, there is something really remote about landing the Marjors to madness that Spielberg captures with arousing images and impressive camera work. At one point, we see the jar of wrinkling mass inside the jar, which is supposed to represent a jerking fetus left in its own devices. Such Gnarly images are mostly inspired by a predictable movie Spielberg habit to convey feelings of fear to a great visual championship (instinct that culminates beautifully in “jaws”).

Although “something bad” is not a good horror, it is still an important movie about making movies because it gives us the opportunity to chart the path directly to the most famous films of Spielberg, which contain horror with family drama elements. There are some really great discoveries if you look closer, such as handling her demonic presence through a smart proposal alone, or in a Quick Spielberg Cameo (!!), alongside Carl Gottlieb, who wrote the manuscript “Jaws” a few years later. So, if you have loved Spielberg’s movie ethics and want to see some of his earliest ideas in action, “something bad” deserves a one-time clock.