Slashdot Mirror
Spider-Man, Star Wars and the Power of Myth
Like Star Wars, Spider-Man has the classic elements of a successful myth. A typically American story, it's less pretentious and hyped than Star Wars and more accessible to kids and die-hard comic book buffs, who remember the great, golden age of Marvel Comics. I'm one of them, I was there.
The old form still has legs. One film analysts told the Wall Street Journal last week that with the success of Spider-Man, the blockbuster bar has been raised. In fact, he said, this movie has changed Hollywood's perception of what a blockbuster is. That makes it interesting for George Lucas, next up at your local megaplex.
It's tough to explain, in the age of cable, gaming, the Net and the Web, just how central comics were for years to a culture of brainy, nerdy, alienated pre-Net teenage boys. Now, hostile jerks can flame people on the Net. Before, they could only read sci-fi books, build model planes and erector sets, but mostly, feast on comics and dream of becoming more powerful.
In the 21st century, they can download, program and game, but in the 50s and 60s, comic books and rock-and-roll were prominent among the few accessible forms of popular culture for individualists with brain cells, a cheap, simple pleasure that cost a dime, then a quarter. How shockingly primitive when compared to the world of the computer nerd or hacker.
Mainstream culture was dull, religiously appropriate and homogenized. Comic books and rock music were rebellious, subversive and naturally came under murderous fire from parents, teachers and politicians.
Before, they could only read comics and fantasize about becoming more powerful. Elaborate ratings systems and restrictive codes eventually suffocated the comics' angry, biting spirit and made them as bland as network TV -- a cultural loss and free-speech outrage heading soon to a computer near you -- but not before Marvel and other comic creators cranked out some classic yarns, from Spider-Man and Batman to the X-Men and other superheroic tales.
What makes these stories so popular and enduring? Perhaps because they all embody certain themes. There's the split-personality hero, usually a nerd who acquires great powers but at enormous cost, who always gets something and loses something. He gets to zip along past New York City skyscrapers, for instance, but we know he isn't likely to end up with the girl. Or, he lives in a mansion and drives a Batmobile, but he's depressed and lonely. Or he's a mutant wolverine with fingers of steel who can't ever have a casual beer with his pals.
He cherishes his powers, but we know he can't ever be comfortable with his life. Robert Kane's early Batman: The Dark Knight was disturbingly dark and angry before the moralists turned comic books to bland mush. Few people remember that Kane ended his first Batman series with our hero giving up on life and essentially committing suicide by turning himself into the famed Arkham Asylum, where villains from the Joker to the Riddler were being held.
Stories like Spider-Man and Batman also have a uniquely American and, until September 11, old-fashioned sense of civics. Spider-man's motto is "With great power comes great responsibility, " a bizarre notion even to hackers. Wouldn't that have seemed clunky before the terrorist attacks? Now it has a certain resonance.
Batman's Bruce Wayne, along with the Superhero stars and any number of X-Men, never shirk their duty to the public, even though the fickle populace is sure, at some point, to turn on them. No matter how tempted, they are, they do what they're supposed to do.
The late teacher and mythologist Joseph Campbell wrote that myth was still one of the powerful forces in the world. The origins and power of myth are still central, from the comic book lover to the hacker. The success of revived yarns like Stan Lee's Spider-Man, while they rarely seem to take themselves as seriously as their fans take them, is amazing, and proves his point. We seem to constantly be turning backwards to myths for inspiration and entertainment, while we are busy making the myths of tomorrow but don't really know which ones will take.
The Spider-Man story is pretty basic, especially when compared to the lumbering twists and turns of Star Wars: wimpy outer-borough kid contracts enormous powers, learns to use them wisely and well, faces terrible danger, sacrifices much.
Peter Parker isn't as deep as the Skywalker brothers and Uncle Ben is no Obi-Wan. But as the box office receipts demonstrate, the writers at Marvel comics have held their own when it comes to myth-making. Sometimes, simpler is better.
"more accessible to kids"
Isn't it rated PG-13 vs. Star Wars' PG ratings?
Kiss my bass.
Skywalker had a brother? Which Skywalker? Not Luke (maybe Jon Katz has the Really Special Edition, who knows). I know Anakin doesn't have a brother... hmmm... another Katz mix up?
"Backups are for wimps. Real men upload their data to an FTP site and have everyone else mirror it." -- Linus Torvalds
Should have read this first. This article should be moderated -1 Flamebait.
.
It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
Actually, Leia and Luke are brothers
That's a bet I'd take.
Never take moderation advice from sigs, including this one.
Why is it so essential to try to analyze something that should just be left alone. Let it be what it is, don't try to explain it, compare it, what ever. Those of us who read/saw/etc Spiderman etc and those who didn't really don't need the effort. Its part of your life and it relates to you, or it doesn't, you learn what you can from it, the experience is solely yours. Sheesh.
Perhaps you can learn a bit from Ben Parker: "With great power comes great responsibility".
Now how about adapting that to more meaningful journalism, instead of trying to over analyze everything.
Salon had an interesting editorial presenting
a different perspective, suggesting that Star Wars had
its roots in sci fi fiction rather than grand myths.
Check it out, it's a worthwhile read.
-- Martini
A quick glance over his last 20 stories show an avergae of 370 comments per story, his top three garnering 1021, 713 and 633. This man walks right behind the fury of the anti-MS brigade.
Strange thing is, Katz is universally (face it, Slashdot is our universe) abhorred, belittled and flamed week after week, yet remains gainfully(?) employed by Slashdot, and continues to pull in the page views.
In summation, the perfect troll. ;)
...that Spider-Man will have a significantly larger opening weekend than AOTC, because AOTC is opening on far fewer screens. The only valid comparison will be what their total gross is once they've had their runs.
Incidentally, there is concern in the press that Spider-Man may peak too early because it opened on so many screens; however, I'm sure it was intentional, as they knew they had to make as much money as possible in the two weeks before AOTC opened.
As I begun to read it:
"Oh great, another JonKatz rant..."
After the first paragraph or two though, I began to think:
"Hm, maybe Jon gets a bad rap too much, this actually makes a bit of sense."
Then he started tying in the net and how script kiddies are today's version of comic book readers:
"Well, he started off well, this is kind of a little out-there, but I'll cut him some slack."
Then he starts talking about the post-9/11 meaning of sci-fi:
"Forget it, this guys a twit. I shouldn't have even started reading it."
Moral of the story: Jon can write pretty well if he wants to. Not everything has to deal with 9/11 though or about the alienation of nerds and geeks.
int func(int a);
func((b += 3, b));
Or he's a mutant wolverine with fingers of steel who can't ever have a casual beer with his pals.
Obviously, you're talking out of your ass again. Wolvie has adamantium claws and frequents bars quite often, usually enjoying a brewsky or two. Hell, he's Canadian and if you don't drink at least two beers a day, they'll deport your ass faster than you can say "Hockey Night in Canada".
Nothing to see here, move along.
Linux - Because Mommy taught me to Share.
I went to see Spider-Man because I've loved the character since I was a kid. I've since recommended the movie to anybody who wants to know because I liked it. Yes, Spider-Man was heavily advertised. None of that made any difference to me.
Obviously advertising can make a big difference in the popularity of a product, but if you would bother to read any Advertising 101 textbook you'll find out that advertising is most effective for differentiating products that have litle difference. That's why there's so much advertising for laundary detergent: they're all the same. Movies may appear to be very different to movie fans, but in terms of consumer perception movies are almost a commodity: they are one of several options for a weekend's entertainment. Lucas could have done no advertising whatsoever for AOTC and all the Star Wars fans would have still showed up with their plastic light sabers, but the general public who simply want to know what to do for a date or some time with the kids would have ignored it.
(There are also other intentions for advertising besides product differentiation. Insert standard AIDA lecture here.)
So now I put the question back to you: you've spent your money on products before. Do *you* only buy products because of advertising? If not, whty do you assume everyone else is an advertising drone?
Miko O'Sullivan
He managed to squeeze a reference to 9-11 in a freakin cartoon review. I love it. I had no idea the world was as deep and mysterious until Mr. Katz started writing. I think I will go buy his book on dogs to see if I am missing something there too.
***I GOT NUTHIN***
Katz posted something reasonable!
It wasn't that reasonable. Note his following comment:
Peter Parker isn't as deep as the Skywalker brothers and Uncle Ben is no Obi-Wan
Clearly, Katz wasn't paying attention to some of the more subtle aspects of the Spider-man movie. The movie was Christ metaphor. He seems to have missed the Green Goblin's attempt to persuade Parker to join him (symbolic of Satan's tempting of Christ, offering him the whole world if only he would join forces with him). There was also the stigmata and shed blood, as well as a few more obvious biblical references for the clue-impaired (Goblin's attack on Aunt May, and his insistence on her finishing the prayer to state his nature).
And this doesn't even cover the Goblin's demonic dualism (he died from the nanogas. Was his powers the result of the gas? Or demonic possession of his corpse?) Notice his discussions with "himself"; there are clearly two personalities, and one of them is not merely a distortion of his former self, but a new entity altogether. Notice how he bows before it (the mask scene) and begs (unsuccessfully) for it not to use his body to perform its evil desires.
And that doesn't even go into the rejection of false dichotomies (the "will you save the woman you love or the innocent children?" choice). Parker's refusal to make that choice would be a great lesson for many of us, since similar false choices ("ban guns to save the children", "abandon civil liberties to protect ourselves from the terrorists", etc) confront many of us these days.
Spider-man may not have been even remotely a perfect movie, but to suggest that any random star wars movie has more "depth" is laughable.
In 1939, Gone With the Wind grossed a total of about $192 million ..adjusted for inflaction, it made about $2.3 BILLION DOLLARS.
i es.html) for my info.
In 1997, Titanic grossed about $600 million...adjusted for inflation...$0.6 BILLION.
So..Gone With the Wind made 3.83 TIMES AS MUCH as Titanic...
You wonder why they don't do things in terms of tickets sold don't you? They just keep increasing the price of movies so they can say last year's movie beat the year before's.
And yes, I do realize that these aren't opening week ticket sales; they are the total income for the movies.
I used this: Site (http://history.acusd.edu/gen/filmnotes/costs-mov
...sigh...you'd expect the Slashdot crowd to realize this...but since we're talking about Katz...I guess it slides.
Not everything has to deal with 9/11 though or about the alienation of nerds and geeks.
;-)
He writes about Columbine too! Well, ok that is covered by the alienation thing but it IS a different event
Eve Fairbanks says I drive a hybrid!LOL
...committing suicide by turning himself into the famed Arkham Asylum
I knew Batman was powerful, but I had no idea that he could transmute into works of architecture!
-- Give me ambiguity or give me something else!
This film didn't shock anybody. The critics pretty much universly loved the film. JonKatz should do just a tad more research before he bases an entire article off of a preposterous claim.
If you just go to RottenTomatoes.com which compiles move reviews into one big list and takes the ratio of good to bad you'd know that SpiderMan got an unusually high 84% positive reviews. Check out the reviews
Offtopic: also check out the review for one of the worst movies of all time: Battlefield Earth. Some of the reviews are so funny it nearly makes me want to cry.
The Generation
I'd say something witty here, but I'm not that bright.
do you mean Noam Chomsky, the linguist?
Yep, too much cofee already make my spelling even worse. Mr. Chomsky has a lot of interesting ideas, if you are only familiar with his linguistics then you are missing out on a lot of good mind material. I have a lot of respect for Noam's honesty in politics - but I wish he would spend more time in proposing solutions rather than just bash my culture. He repetidly make the clasic error of assuming that identification of a problem is the same as fixing it, and unfortuntatly he has collected enough groupies around him that parrot every word of his - so I doubt he'll change, unless he get a mind altering infection of the brain. Oh well.
(run-on sentance ballanced with a terse one)
Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.
Katz can't write well or, if he can, he chooses not to in all of his writings that I've read. I'll grant you that he has a certain knack for artistically wrapping words up in today's style and making his writing and the events that he writes about sound more profound than they are really. However, the mark of a good writer is to communicate well and to shed some light on a subject. Katz fails miserably on both counts. His thoughts are clouded. His premises are often, undeniably, incorrect. His conclusions are often wrong, misguided, or completely unclear. Katz can't communicate anything clearly, never mind persuade. Jon's writing lacks any significant insight on anything. What's more, besides just being a hack, he's insincere. He is constantly jumping from bandwagon to bandwagon and cloaking his words in that certain vagueness to cater to his audiences' fickle cause du jour. I, for one, can't respect Katz.
Good try Katz, but you're full of hot air.
Spiderman will do better because it'll be a better movie. Episode I was so bad, people don't want to be tortured again. It's that fucking simple.
And this is coming from a guy with an Empire poster hanging on his wall signed by George Lucas, Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher, and Harrison Ford.
For once, a semi-decent read from Mr. Katz.. right up to this point:
Elaborate ratings systems and restrictive codes eventually suffocated the comics' angry, biting spirit and made them as bland as network TV -- a cultural loss and free-speech outrage heading soon to a computer near you -- but not before Marvel and other comic creators cranked out some classic yarns, from Spider-Man and Batman to the X-Men and other superheroic tales
For the record, the only real 'restrictive' code that comics have ever had was implemented in the 1950's, known as the Comics' Code Authority. This was a voluntary system, similar to modern movie ratings in the US today. It was brought in for the same reasons - the government was ready, willing, and able to deal with the issue itself, and the industry stepped up to the plate first.
Spider-Man and the X-Men weren't even a glimmer in Lee/Ditko/Kirby's collective eyes when the Code was introduced; what Katz is talking about here is beyond me. The bulk of early Marvel comics, well into the 1980's if not further, were highly sanatized due to the Code. Yes, they had some revolutionary stories, but they were 100% in compliance with the Code (or they wouldn't have gotten any decent distribution).
The only mainsteam comic to not abide by the Code until rather recently was, oddly enough, Spider-Man. Marvel did a 2 issue storyline involving drug use in the 70's - considered quite controversial at the time, and would never have passed the Code's strict standards. Marvel took a risk and released the issues without the Code approval on them. After that, it wasn't until the 80's at least, and moreso the 90's, before we really saw any comics without the Code prominent on their covers.
Now, the Code itself has changed radically over the years, and a lot of things in your average 'tame' comic these days would have been strictly forbidden in the 60's... but regardless, saying that Spider-Man and the X-Men did ANYTHING before the Code is not only false, it does a disservice to the original creators. Marvel in the early 60's managed to put out some amazing ideas, all while toeing the line nicely with the Comics' Code.
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
Just as a sugestion: look at Ralph Nader. I find Ralph Nader not only to be more inteligent than Noam, but more effective. That's my problem with Chomsky - he just likes to tear things down, and blame his inefectivness at communicating on conspiricies and the grand spectre of the "Corporate-Boogy-Man."
Raplh, bless his little heart, gets thing done. I don't agree with him a goodly amount of the time, but he has my respect, and I wish more people were like him. Ralph also is a happy soul - he smiles, makes jokes and doesen't take things too seriously, Chomsky is a sour old house-frau by compaison, and people pick up on this. People like joyfull people by nature. Oh well:off to get more cofee. (Ralph whould be proud: Shade grown, fair-trade cofee)
PS: If you like cofee, get some Sahde-Grown, organic, fair-trace cofee even if you don't give a rat's ass about the environment, wages, or living coditions. The stuff just tastes better, and it's only 20% more in price.
Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.
wimpy outer-borough kid contracts enormous powers, learns to use them wisely and well, faces terrible danger, sacrifices much.
Star Wars plot summary (from me):
wimpy outer-rim kid contracts enormous powers, learns to use them wisely and well, faces terrible danger, sacrifices much. Repeat.
So, what exactly is so different about the basic plot structures here? Split personality/dark and brooding hero whos powers seperate him from those he wants to be with? Hero doesn't get the girl? Yeah, remember Return of the Jedi? Never shirks on duty to the common good, even though it may cost him everything he holds dear? Yup, got that too. Maybe you mean the Orphan Hero thing... Oh wait, Star Wars has that, too.
All the myth elements you attribute to Spider-man have already been explored, repeatedly and in greater detail, in the Star Wars series, and Episodes 1-3 are following the same basic lines you've outlined as well, with a few minor twists. If spreading it out over multiple films makes it to hard for you to follow, than you have no business publishing a critical analysis of the subject matter.
I've never been a Katz basher, but come on! This so called 'comparison' is absurd.
Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
The book is A Dog Year, about his experiences with 4 dogs. My wife is currently reading it, and I haven't asked her much about it, but every once in a while she laughs a lot, and every once in a while she gets very angry.
My wife volunteers for the SPCA, and we're both really pro-adoption and pro-mutt. Katz isn't - he likes breeds (and believes that a dog's personality is mostly determined by breed), and he likes puppies, and he thinks rescuing dogs is a fad (and possibly a bad idea, because of the dog's emotional baggage). He also believes in putting a dog down when it has a major health complication (he puts down one lab for heart problems, the other for cancer). These differences in opinion are the source of much of the anger.
His style seems to be the "personal journalism" that we all love - relating all the experiences without much censorship. For instance, he says that he bought a puppy from the mall, then admits that it is a lousy idea to do so (the dog dies young). He admits how frustrating dogs can be, and how tempting it is to hit them when they are being frustrating. He also admits throwing a ball into a flooding river, causing his dog to go in after it and get washed down the river. He jumps in to save the dog, then gets trapped himself, and his other dog has to save the two of them.
Again, I can't recommend it, because I haven't read it. My wife thinks she may be able to recommend it, but not to SPCA types. If you want a book for SPCA types, an excellent one is Lost and Found. The author, Elizabeth Hess, is also a journalist, and spends some time in an animal shelter. It hits all the interesting points, from euthenasia to puppy mills to the truth behind those AKC papers. I strongly recommend it to anyone who enjoys pets, especially if you are thinking of getting a new one.
I'd say it was semi-decent right up until the point Posted by JonKatz....
Outdoor digital photography, mostly in New Engl
otherwise intelligent people persist in identifing this system of endless, mindless consumption as "their culture"
;)
Thanks for considering me to be at least somewhat inteligent
Unfortunaly, I don't think that you our I exist outside of the curent culture - grudgingly, we are products of it. Even our decenting voices are products of this culture - flawed though it it, this culture seem to al least give lip-service to differing thougts. We haven't been locked up, or beaten too much.
Anyways, my general rant on Chomsky is that he is interesting, but ot only inefective, but possibly damaging to his own cause. I gather we're on opposite sides of the political fence - but there are vast terretories of common ground for people like us to discover. People like Raplh Nader and John McCain give me inspiration that we can have a better future - people like Chomsky and Limbaugh, although great entertainemnt, just devide rational people from each other.
All too often, a good idea gets labeled by one side or the other as belonging to "that hippie Chomsky" or "that fat idiot Limbaugh." It's too bad the these lables can destroy a potentionally good idea. Noam and Rush are just to easy of a target, and discourse dies when either one gets mentioned. Anyways - at least neighter of them are taking about stupid subjects like Elisibeth Taylor, or NSYNC so perhaps I'm being a bit harsh on both.
Cheers.
Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.
Spider-Man shocked analysts and critics last week, racking up a record-breaking $114 million opening weekend for Sam Raimi's warm-hearted adaptation about the web-slinging arachnoid-nerd from Queens who gets the bad guy but really wants the girl.
My God, Mr. Katz, you make Spider-Man sound like some indie flick from the early Kevin Smith days instead of a summer blockbuster that Sony Pictures, Inc. spent over $50 million marketing the flick to the masses. How does it surprise anyone other than you that it made $114 million? Here's a surprise prediction for you: Spider-Man, AotC, the Two Towers, and Goldmember are all going to make $200+ million dollars for their studios! Wow. I surprise myself! Maybe I should go into internet journalism and write witty and insightful columns about how everything relates to the Columbine shootings and the alienation of nonconformist high-schoolers... oh, wait. That position's filled.
Light a fire for a man and he'll be warm for a day. Light a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
Speaking of bets, I'll bet that when and if the Spider-Man franchise has spun its fifth movie, the franchise will be way more "elephantine" and clueless than STAR WARS is now.
Although I am disappointed in some of what Lucas has done with his franchise, let credit be given where due: the rarest achievement in cinema is the preplotted multi-part blockbuster film saga. Arguably THE GODFATHER was first, although Coppola could have quit at any time with honors. Most other series make it up as they go along. STAR WARS was the only prewritten SF saga until Peter Jackson came along with his Tolkien trilogy, and even then Jackson had the advantage of shooting everything at once and releasing at leisure.