Came across this article earlier -- an interview with John Leonetti (brother of Matthew) who worked on Poltergeist as a camera assistant. He claims Spielberg did indeed direct Poltergeist -- and Hooper was brought on set as a figurehead, while Spielberg actually made the film.

https://www.indiewire.com/2017/07/steve ... 201855869/#!

At this point...who really cares? The movie exists, it's phenomenally entertaining and has stood the test of time...let Hooper have the goddamn credit.

Nobody is campaigning to change the credits that I've ever seen. I find it all fascinating because the people defending Hooper kind of don't get it. I mean if it's not plainly obvious to anyone what happened there, you probably don't know what you're looking at.

It's worth noting Jerry Goldsmith never even met Tobe Hooper. Not a single time. Which means Hooper didn't have a thing to do with final cut most likely. Just as John Beal never met Hooper either during post production on THE FUNHOUSE. Which tells you Hooper was probably "going through some things" (I.E. drug issues, since those had gotten him removed from a couple of movies he was hired to direct, and which numerous crew have said were rampant in his behavior on the set) back then if the major decisions in post production, scoring and probably final cut too, were being routed through those movies' producers.

I also find it telling because the quality of those two films is several degrees above really anything Hooper made before or since, at least on a studio level (Texas Chainsaw I don't count because it's like a freewheeling indie made at the beginning of his career, it's not the kind of project he was entrusted with back in the 80s and which he failed mostly spectacularly with, outside of Poltergeist and The Funhouse).

Or course I give him credit especially on The Funhouse. I just don't think Poltergeist's success relied on his contribution much (at all). The proof is in whats onscreen, it's visual language, and the fact Spielberg and his crew handled every element of production through to its release.

The real mystery to me is did Spielberg basically direct it because Hooper was strung out and he was forced to -- or whether it was always the plan because the DGA wouldn't let him direct that and ET at the same time.

Monterey Jack wrote: ↑Wed Sep 21, 2022 8:38 am At this point...who really cares? The movie exists, it's phenomenally entertaining and has stood the test of time...let Hooper have the goddamn credit.

But if he didn't actually direct it, should he get the credit?