Ranking every movie in Steven Spielberg's filmography

Spielberg isn’t the best at comedy. “The Terminal” is more than just a comedy, though. It’s a saccharine dramedy starring Tom Hanks as a man from a fictional Eastern European country who becomes stuck living in the airport. In terms of Spielberg's “Was this Oscar bait?” films, this is the one that is a full-on misfire.

Sorry, Millennials. “Hook” isn’t good. It’s cheesy. It’s a slog. It’s not funny. It’s heavy-handed. Robin Williams isn’t good in it. Maybe Spielberg needed to get “Hook” out of his system, but we had to then endure it.

The movie this is a sequel to is much higher on this list. After “Jurassic Park” was a culture- and industry-changing hit, a sequel was rushed into production. Spielberg seemed to do it out of a professional obligation. The whole thing feels like a cash grab. We aren’t saying Spielberg is a guy who makes arthouse movies where profit doesn’t matter, but at least they usually feel considered as projects.

“War of the Worlds” is a classic story, but is it any good? Spielberg knows how to direct alien-heavy sci-fi films, but apparently he doesn’t hit a double, much less a homer, every time he goes to that realm. If we imagined a version of this film not directed by Spielberg and not starring Tom Cruise, we might be able to think, “You know, that turned out pretty well.” Spielberg did direct, though, and Cruise did star. Thus, we feel this one is left lacking.

We’re past the movies we’d say are subpar, the ones that don’t rise to the level of mediocre. Now, we’re at the “Ehh, it’s fine” level. These are the mediocrities, watchable but not remarkable. “The BFG,” which is about a giant who is big and friendly, isn’t the best Roald Dahl adaptation. However, it’s also not the worst. It’s just kind of whatever.

For the one and only time, Spielberg went in for an out-and-out comedy. It’s of the school of ‘70s, throw-everything-at-the-wall humor. It’s anarchic, it’s raunchy, it’s sometimes racist. Because so much is thrown at the wall, some of “1941” does work. There are good moments in this war comedy. For every good joke, though, there are two that make us groan.

On paper, this had the makings of Spielberg’s worst movie. Had “Ready Player One” been a straight-ahead adaptation of Ernest Cline’s “What if Stephen King was an even worse, less-restrained writer?” novel about a world where everybody spends much of their time in this virtual world called the OASIS. There is an element, and we don’t like to project authorial intent too much, where it feels like Spielberg is asking, “Did I poison culture?” That gives a little extra juice on top of, you know, all the stuff from the book that is completely uninteresting.

If you find yourself laughing at a sex scene in a movie about Mossad agents looking to assassinate those they believe responsible for the 1972 massacre in Munich, things are amiss. There are some good performances and some gripping dramatic moments in “Munich.” There are also moments that are truly baffling from a Spielberg movie. He’s too talented to be so tone deaf! As such, this definite Oscar bait falls into the mediocre category.

Spielberg did better with “Amistad” than with “Munich.” Perhaps the fact it was set in the 1800s gave him enough distance to tackle this historical story. Of course, there are those who might argue, reasonably, that Spielberg has too much distance from a story about a rebellion on a slave ship and the ensuing legal battle to really handle it well. Honestly? Had he cast a better actor than Matthew McConaughey in his role, “Amistad” could have ended up in the next category of Spielberg’s filmography.

Speaking of which! That’s right, we think “Crystal Skull” is a decent movie! We don’t think Shia LaBeouf is bad in it; Cate Blanchett is having fun; Karen Allen is good; and we don’t even mind the nuclear testing stuff. The movie just needs a bit more form, one more strong set piece, and an ending that is a better reveal than the alien stuff. It’s definitely watchable, if a drop-off from even the next Indiana Jones movie on this list.

It was a good idea. Tintin, the boy reporter, is a popular comic character in Europe, and Spielberg (along with producer Peter Jackson) wanted to bring him to the big screen in the United States. Animated to evoke the comics, the look was…a little off. Not terrible, though! The same goes for the plot, which is fine, if not as rip-roaring as it could have been. They didn’t end up making the planned sequel, which is fine, but had they made the sequel that also would have been fine with us.

This has to stand as Spielberg’s least-remembered film, right? The one that, when you are rattling off his filmography, you might forget? It’s a perfectly fine remake of the perfectly fine 1940s melodrama “A Guy Named Joe.” That kind of makes “Always” for the completionists only, which is interesting because it’s not in his bottom 10, and it’s a watchable movie.

If you don’t include “Duel,” which, as we noted, we did, “The Sugarland Express” is Spielberg’s first movie. It’s less “Spielbergian” than “Duel,” but it also feels like a directorial debut. The story is smaller, but it doesn’t lack for ambition. Spielberg’s talent is clear, and he would grow to tell human stories, but his acumen for style and scale was stronger early on.

On the other hand, “War Horse” would feel like a parody of Oscar bait. A movie based on a play based on a novel about a horse in World War I? This is Spielberg, though. By 2011, he could handle battle scenes and the arena of war in his sleep. However, he didn’t sleepwalk through “War Horse.” It’s just a movie about a horse. It’s interesting, but far from a hidden gem.

Spielberg finally got to make a musical, and given the career trajectory of the main cast of his take on “West Side Story,” he may deserve added kudos for making this movie work. Turns out Rachel Zegler might not actually be a good actor! Had Spielberg been the first to adapt “West Side Story,” this might sit higher in the rankings. He isn’t, though, and his version is decidedly not as good as the one that won Best Picture in 1961.

Famously, “The Color Purple” was nominated for 11 Oscars but didn’t win any. It’s a dark melodrama based on Alice Walker’s acclaimed novel, but Spielberg was not well-suited to the material. Getting strong acting performances and making the movie look good? Sure, but the direction isn’t fully locked in. Spielberg was gunning for that Oscar, and he’d eventually get two, but this wasn’t the one to make that happen.

This movie features Indiana Jones’ worst sidekick(s) by a wide margin. Ke Huy Quan has had a remarkable renaissance as an adult actor, and it’s not his fault Short Round is so annoying, but man, is he ever annoying. And yet, Kate Capshaw is even worse as Willie Scott. That being said, Spielberg could help but deliver a handful of killer action sequences, so “Temple of Doom” rounds out our “decent” tier of films.

“Duel” gets bumped to pretty good for being a debut film made on a small budget and with little time. It was a film made for American television, after all, but it got a theatrical release in Europe (and a limited release in the United States). This movie, about a driver being menaced by an unseen truck driver, is intense, moves with gusto, and shows burgeoning skill. It’s too slim to be any higher on this list, though.

This is a strange film, but it isn’t necessarily trying to be. “Empire of the Sun” centers on a British boy being held in an internment camp by the Japanese during World War II. It’s not quite able to nail the tone, but there are good pieces in place. Spielberg also benefited from casting Christian Bale as the lead. With a lesser young actor, this movie probably wouldn’t have risen to being pretty good and an interesting viewing.

With the right talent in place, a shrug of a movie can still deliver. “The Post” is a 2017 film directed by Spielberg and starring Tom Hanks and Meryl Streep. Nobody did anything remarkable in it or with it. It just happened to be directed by an icon and it stars two icons, so even if everybody is going half speed it’s still solid.

“A.I.” is the inverse of “The Post.” It’s so ambitious and tries so hard, but Spielberg could quite nail the landing. To be fair, he was taking over the project from Stanley Kubrick. This film is all homers and strikeouts. It’s either cooking or flailing. That, of course, makes it highly watchable.

We’re moving up to the good movies. Hey, most directors would love the chance to make 13 movies, much less have 13 that range from good to great. “Minority Report” is the sci-fi thriller pairing Tom Cruise and Spielberg that works. It’s trippy, it’s dark, and it’s a lot of fun. If not for a twist-spoiling bit of casting, “Minority Report” might have been really good.

By 2022, Spielberg had definitely learned how to make smaller, human-focused movies. Of course, it helps that this movie is basically about him. “The Fabelmans” sees Spielberg delving deep into his childhood, particularly the dissolution of his parents’ marriage. It’s not an incredible movie by any means, but it doesn’t feel self-indulgent, and that’s kind of remarkable.

“Bridge of Spies” is slicker than it seems. It’s a movie about lawyers and prisoner exchanges, so it isn’t epic. There’s a running bit about having a cold. Spielberg manages to make it feel close to epic, though. Mark Rylance won Best Supporting Actor for this film, which is a bit of an odd win, but he is quite good in the movie alongside Tom Hanks.

We’re already jumping to really good movies. “Temple of Doom” was a smidge too dark, and the characters alongside Indy weren’t a ton of fun. “Last Crusade” is a romp, and it has Sean Connery joining in on the fun as Indiana Jones’ dad. This movie is so good, and so enjoyable, but sometimes it does feel a little like it is retreading the original Indiana Jones film, which you will note you haven’t seen yet.

Sure, it turns out that it seems this story about a con man was based on a story that was, well, a bit of a con itself, but who cares? This is rollicking filmmaking. Nobody would know who Frank Abagnale Jr. is without “Catch Me If You Can” anyway. Leonardo DiCaprio is really good in this movie, and so is Tom Hanks. The only reason this isn’t great is that several actors are playing younger than they can do so convincingly, the same issue that holds Greta Gerwig’s “Little Women” back.

For a movie that centers on small children and an alien that, frankly, looks a little freaky, “E.T.” has no right being as good as it is. That is fully built upon Spielberg’s direction. Well, that and Melissa Mathison’s screenplay. That’s not to knock the child actors, but, you know, they are children, and they could only do so much acting.

“Lincoln” is about as good as period dramas get. It’s a bunch of guys with old-timey facial hair talking in rooms, and it’s really good. The whole thing is compelling, even if it is dealing with well-known history. Of course, it goes a long way that Daniel Day-Lewis plays Abraham Lincoln, and he reasonably won his third Oscar.

This is where the great movies that Spielberg made start, though “Schindler’s List” is a great movie you may only want to watch once. The movie is remarkably well made. Spielberg finally won Best Director and Best Picture. “Schindler’s List” has great acting and incredible cinematography. It’s also largely about the Holocaust, which makes it somber. As the story goes, after making “Schindler’s List,” Spielberg didn’t want to make any more action movies with Nazis as the bad guys, because it felt flippant.

Back-to-back Best Director films for Spielberg. Of course, famously “Saving Private Ryan” didn’t win Best Picture. “Shakespeare in Love” is not a bad movie by any means, but it isn’t “Saving Private Ryan.” It’s a great war film, gripping, exciting, harrowing, and human. This one is definitely in the war movie pantheon.

Of Spielberg’s alien-centric movies, “Close Encounters” is the best. Sure, Spielberg says he can no longer relate to the ending after having kids, but it was the right ending for this story. “Close Encounters” is strange in the best way. It’s always slightly unnerving, but it is never heavy-handed about it. There are a few directors who could stand to learn how to do unnerving with subtlety.

Spielberg’s top three movies are all iconic. They are all blockbusters. They are all great. “Jurassic Park” changed film. It made CGI feel viable. It made Jeff Goldblum a plausible movie star. “Jurassic Park” still works. It still looks good, which is remarkable for a movie this old. Sure, they never managed to make a single good sequel, but “Jurassic Park” rules.

“Jaws” birthed the summer blockbuster and a lot of fear of sharks and open water. It’s still great. It’s still intense. However, for a horror movie (and “Jaws” is a horror movie) it has so many memorable characters, and it’s centered on such strong performances. Over 50 years later, summer blockbusters still haven’t really surpassed “Jaws.”

To make a movie better than “Jaws” is an incredible feat. “Raiders of the Lost Ark,” the first Indiana Jones movie, is the best action-adventure movie ever made. We aren’t being hyperbolic. That is our take. Nobody, not even Spielberg himself, has ever made an adventure film better than “Raiders of the Lost Ark.” It is the best movie from one of the best directors to ever do it.