Not as good as you've heard

Rating: 5/10 (20 May 2013)

No, it's not a poor movie, but a 7.9 is a very generous rating, likely helped by its massive box office and a fair amount of nostalgia. I watched this the other day, for the first time since the 80's, and was surprised at how trite it was. A 5 or 6 at best. A few things that stood out to me:
1) Child actors -- All I could think of was The Phantom Menace, and how it's always a big risk to cast a young, unproven kid as a main character. Henry Thomas as Elliott wasn't quite as painful as Jake Lloyd, but he still wasn't that good. Far too many of his lines were delivered with a grating screech. Drew Barrymore wasn't too cloying as the cutsie li'l girl but the combination of she or the two boys being in each and every scene meant we never got a break from child actors. There wasn't anyone in this movie who gave an outstanding -- or even above average -- performance.
2) The "connection" between Elliott and E.T -- What are the rules regarding this connection? How come sometimes Elliott is completely in synch with E.T. but other times they're feeling things separately? And why would E.T. do that to Elliott in the first place? What purpose did it serve to make a young boy, who's trying to help him, suffer? His brother later says that Elliott "feels his (E.T.'s) feelings"? To what end? And why does this empathy come and go? Had Elliott been heretofore unable to feel emotions? Is that what E.T. was trying to teach him? We're never given any insight on Elliott prior to E.T.'s arrival so anything about Elliott's background is just conjecture.
3) E.T.'s intelligence -- Why does a member of a race that's conquered inter-stellar travel act like such a simp? He can build a MacGyver-like contraption to send signals into space but he still doesn't know better than to pop a metal toy in his mouth and start chewing it? He springs out of his body bag and starts babbling "phone home, phone home" to the point that he has to be shushed by a 10 year old kid. That's a horrible inconsistency that can only be explained away with a huge leap of logic.
4) The sets and scenery -- Fans of MST3K will remember episode 303 Pod People, which was an early 80's E.T. knockoff. When I watched the original again it was almost like the makers of Pod People were intentionally taking the mick out of E.T. All the jokes about the fog machines from that episode of MST3K could apply to E.T. Southern California is an arid climate, all of the day shots feature bright blue skies, yet each night the pavement is soaked as if it stopped raining just a minute ago, while the air is thick with moisture. There were frequent lapses in continuity when it came to cloud cover and daylight. The worst is when the boys are taking E.T. to the rendezvous with his space ship. As they break the police blockade it's broad daylight; suddenly the sun is red and setting; and what was likely a couple minutes later they're in the woods at night -- although when the ship takes off it's dusk again. The ship rises into a beautifully clear evening, with no breeze visible in the tree tops, but back in the woods everyone's again shrouded in mist and what appears to be a stiff wind is blowing everyone's hair. Seriously, Pod People wasn't half as ridiculous about these things.
Then there's all the indoor shots at Elliott's house. You never see a shade covering the windows, only Venetian blinds. Yet even in the middle of the sunniest day the inside of the house is dark as pitch, necessitating the use of lamps. The deleted scene of E.T. in the bath tub is illustrative of this. Since you get no context for the shot, I assumed it was supposed to be night time given how dark the house was, yet Elliott's mom calls from work to see how he's feeling! Never does anyone mention that hiding E.T. from prying eyes is a concern. On Halloween, Mary is coming down the hallway to take their picture and it's as dark as can be, with candles lit. But then they go outside and it's still daylight. All the indoor shots were so obviously shot on a stage that it comes off like a cut-rate soap opera.
5) A couple other random questions -- How did E.T. know a ship was coming for him? Telepathically? If they were able to communicate that way then why did he have to rig up the "phone" and call them? Why did that one kid have a balaclava on him during a typically gorgeous SoCal afternoon? How come when E.T. first enters Elliott's room he is reaching over his head to touch the objects on the table, yet the next morning he's tall enough to see what's on the table (and no, his neck wasn't extended.)? Why was Mary wearing a satin bathrobe in front of teenage boys in the beginning of the movie, like some sort of temptress? Then she's an anguished divorcée. Then she's an independent career woman. Then she's ditzy and perhaps tipsy on Halloween. It just seems like there was never an agreed upon direction for her character. E.T. can make objects -- including the bike he's riding on -- levitate, but the boys have to lift him into the bike's basket??
I don't dislike the movie. I was 11 when it came out and probably liked it a lot then. As I said, there's still a nostalgia factor in its favor. I just can't buy into the idea that it's a well done film.