He makes some good points.

I do love CE. Spielberg always get's dogged.

Good lord, his perspective is so simplistic and literal (as in so surface level and seeking the didactic). CE3K illustrates a human condition/nature sharply, if you get beyond the surface level of its plot. And Star Wars is working on a, dare I say, "post modern" collaged, textural and cultural way so powerful that it would have to instantly be one of the top most popular and culturally influential movies of all time... oh, wait a minute.

Meanwhile, Ellison was writing that was the roots of simple stuff like "The Terminator", or morality theater of Star Trek, enough said. What? Terminator? Don't get me wrong, I do love my pencil crushing bionic fighting fembots and that episodic of Buck Rogers with Jamie Lee Curtis.

2freaky4church1 said:

No doubt he's a great writer, I wish I could have his degree of success, I grew up reading some of his short stories and of course seeing his work translated or adapted... but he is out of his league of perspective with the comments on Star Wars or Close Encounters in my opinion!

You got to understand, I firmly believe the work can surpass the intention and abilities of it's creators to understand how the work is so valuable.

I'm not comparing Ellison to Lucas or Spielberg, because I know that even they don't undertand why their two 1977 movies are so good even though they were the instigators for them to come together in each instance.

I'm talking about his comments on genre and each movie.