Slashdot Mirror
Sellout: George Lucas in HypeSpace
A couple of months ago, Rob (CmdrTaco) Malda and I were trading e-mail about "Star Wars: Phantom Menace." He gracelessly reminded me that even though he?d seen "Star Wars" 100 times or so, he hadn?t seen it in a movie theater when it first came out (he would have been in diapers) and I had.
Alas, this is so. And given the insane commercial and media hype surrounding "Phantom Menace," I?m the lucky one. (This isn?t a review - I haven?t seen the movie yet.)
The original "Star Wars" came as something of a shock when it appeared two decades ago. It was promoted, of course, but before the age of Mega Hype it was possible to discover a great movie, rather than have one rammed down your throat and into every other orifice.
And the original "Star Wars" was discovered by transfixed nerds and movie lovers. It was a weird movie, half fairy tale and half comic book, yet a very human and accessible one. It proved an instant smash with almost everyone, ordinary ticket buyers along with the non-normal. It celebrated science fiction, technology and heroic oddballs all at once.
A pre -Web movie, fans had fewer ways of spreading the word, but the raves got around. The movie?s genuine stars were technology, animation, imagination and special effects. But in other ways, it was a very old story: the young man or woman called to a great adventure, one in which his community?s survival was at stake. He battles the forces without, but first has to conquer the ones within.
For eons, in various forms from Hercules and the Trojan war to "High Noon" to Batman, this idea has been an elemental myth in virtually every culture. Do we have what it takes to confront evil when it arises and threatens us and the people we love? Will we do the right thing, and comport ourselves with honor and dignity?
The power of myth permeated the original "Star Wars", and not by accident. George Lucas credited the late mythologist Joseph Campbell as a major inspiration for characters like Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader, and even invited Campbell, an academic and writer, to a special screening to view the "Stars Wars" trilogy at Lucas? Skywalker ranch in California.
The journalist Bill Moyers was there at the screening, too, and later recalled that Campbell "reveled in the ancient themes and motifs of mythology unfolding on the wide screen in powerful, contemporary images." Campbell, Moyers remembered, especially exulted aloud in the fact that Lucas had put an up-to-date spin on the timeless hero/quest.
"And what is that?" asked Moyers.
"It?s what Goethe said in Faust but which Lucas has dressed in modern idiom - the message that technology is not going to save us. Our computers, our tools, our machines are not enough. We have to rely on our intuition, our true being."
Campbell also loved the Darth Vader character - the dark and evil man in the mask - as a staple of mythology dating back to ancient wall scribblings.
"Darth Vader," he told Moyers in a later interview, "has not developed his own humanity. He?s a robot. He?s a bureaucrat, living not in terms of himself but in terms of an imposed system. This is the threat to our lives that we all face today. Is the system going to flatten you out and deny your humanity, or are you going to be able to make use of the system so that you are not compulsively serving it?"
Re-reading this interview in "Joseph Campbell, The Power of Myth," I couldn?t help thinking that twenty years later, that Lucas has lost touch with the spirit of his own creation.
Vader would now be out on the network in the employ of some giant corporation, or maybe a gargantuan tel-com, directing the Hype machine and pushing around the competition. Bill Gates doesn?t make it as a truly menacing figure who wants to hurt people, but the mammoth corporatism he has come to embody is creepy enough. It invokes empire, and hovers above us all like some giant spaceship, just waiting to plop down and squash us. And it definitely evokes a system that denies humanity.
Mostly, what I recall about the first Star Wars was the almost spine-tingling sense of simplicity, menace and drama.
There was the first appearance of Lord Vader, the ironic and deflating presence of Harrison Ford?s Han Solo (who, along with R2D2, kept the movie from getting too pompous or heavy-handed), and that curiously emotional moment when Ben Kenobi says to Luke: "Turn off your computer, turn off your machine and do it yourself, follow your feelings, trust your feelings."
And when he did, it worked. Luke rode a crippled, defenseless machine into a Death Star to save the world, and in the end, rose above all the machinery to get the job done. The dozen or so times that I saw the movie, that moment always brought the loudest applause.
If the original "Star Wars" invoked the power of myth, Phantom Menace invokes the power of hype. Lucas has shamelessly sold his soul, thus that of his movie, to magazine editors, TV producers, toy-makers, pizza and fried-chicken purveyors, and the massive corporations cranking out toys, books, calendars and videos. There?s almost no piece of Lucas?s story that he wasn?t happy to peddle to the highest bidder. One can only imagine how many - unlike the original figures -- were created with marketing tie-ins in mind. On May 3, Toys "R" Us sold 1.25 million units of "Phantom" products. According to Entertainment Weekly, tie-ins from the movie will probably represent the biggest event in the history of the toy business.
This week, Pepsi-affiliated Taco Bell, Pizza Hut and Kentucky Fried Chicken began a months- long, TV-saturated, cross-promotional campaign. Each restaurant will be turned into one of the planets in the movie. Each will have its own toys "that can?t be found anywhere else." KFC gets the Jar Jar Binks Squirter, Taco Bell the Anakin Skywalker Transforming Bank, and Pepsi itself is offering four separate commemorative soda cans. There are rumors that Yoda himself will soon be on the tube, guzzling pop.
Is that Lucas message, the point of one of the great creative works in all of popular culture? Get as much as you can? Embrace the bigness and squeeze it for every last nickel?
Yuk. This kind of hype isn?t just about making a few bucks. It?s about manipulating children in the name of greed and influence. It?s about ego and cash. This round, we?re not allowed to discover a great work; we?re nearly beaten to death with it, and it?s calculatedly cute, most profitable and commercial manifestations.
The cacophony is demeaning to Lucas and to his film and insulting to his audience. It?s hard to know which would be worse: if "Phantom Menace" is a great movie defiled by Lucas and his marketing tie-ins or, if it?s a crummy movie lost in the cloud of hype.
Every big movie arrives in a cloud of tie-ins, toy promotions and fast-food marketing schemes these days. Lucas can?t be blamed for that. But if any producer every claimed that his movies were not like all the others, it?s Lucas. The gross commercialism of the pre-Phantom Menace campaign has gone way beyond the usual hard sell, especially given that he has worked to studiously to invoke the image of the pure, independent, anti-Hollywood producer, holed up in his far-from-LA compound in the interest of art and integrity.
Lucas himself has graced the cover of Wired and even corrupted Popular Mechanics (which refers to "film genius" George Lucas) and the films? various stars have fanned out to be photographed for the covers of Time, Newsweek, Premiere, and Vanity Fair. This doesn?t count the barrage of TV appearances ("60 Minutes", et al) scheduled to be unleashed this week.
And for good measure, he?s turned a chunk of the Web into a giant, teeming fanzine and Star Wars shopping mart. X-Files and Buffy sites are crammed with adoring fans too, but they aren?t droid like. They can also be independent, creative and original - their members sometimes writing original episodes when their programs are in hiatus, sometimes even breaking news the producers don?t want to get out. But many of the Star Wars sites are simply worshipful, the movie a faith rather than an imaginative amusement.
Contrast the irony of the man who loudly prohibits any form of advertising in or around his movie in theaters with the one behind money-grubbing sales outlets like the Amazon.com Star Wars Store. The one behind the "paper-engineered" Pit or Battle droid display that can be ordered with the purchase of any of the scores of "Star Wars" titles, calendars, toddler books, paper-action figures and other paraphernalia being sold in chains and books stores.
Lucas himself seems tired of his humble origins, eager to shed his geeky roots, to come in from his self-imposed cold and join the pantheon of mainstream, big-time Hollywood producers. In his interviews, he?s gone to great pains to cast himself as a normal (read: non-geek) guy, sitting at his California breakfast table, appearing in most of his interviews in a plaid shirt, talking about his kids, his digital backlot and his past life as a Hollywood rebel.
Seems like he?s embracing some myth off-screen, too. These days Lucas seems as much of a rebel as Bill Gates, and even more greedy.
The truth is, director James Cameron of "Titanic" (probably not as nice a guy, by most accounts) showed a lot more courage and rebelliousness in the making of his movie. He actually risked forgoing his share of the profits in order to go over budget to make the kind of movie he wanted. "Titanic," was plenty hyped, but Cameron knew to stay away from Pizza Hut, and avoided Lucas? holier-than-thou posture.
Is hype without limit or shame or any shred of dignity? Isn?t there some boundary between a lot of bucks and every buck? Nobody needs that much money, and the avalanche of toys and tie-ins has already obscured the power of myth that suffused the original "Star Wars," no matter how good "Phantom Menace" is or isn?t. We should have been prepared by the end of the trilogy: remember those revolting Ewoks?
"Star Wars" was a breathtakingly original idea in its day, but for all the intergalactic battles, the original movie stayed refreshingly grounded. Ford?s Han Solo was constantly smirking at all the chatter about the Force, Princess Leiea was stuck with that awful hair, and the Empire?s white plastic foot soldiers were profoundly cartoony. The movie never forgot that it was a simple story at heart - high stakes, good guys versus bad guys, the real weapons being good hearts and plenty of guts.
Reeling under the deluge of magazine covers last week - the final straw for me was Vogue?s "exclusive" spread on "Star Wars Couture," complete with the outfits Natalie Portman wears around the Planet Naboo -- I told my family last week that I was considering skipping the movie. A protest against hype. My wife and daughter laughed.
They?re right, of course. I?ll go, eventually. But I?m glad I did get to see "Star Wars" the first time around, in a very different context.
It?s probably just as well that Joseph Campbell died before "Phantom Menace" appeared. It?s hard to believe he?d feel the same way that he did about the original: "?the movie communicates. It is in a language that talks to young people, and that?s what counts. It asks, Are you going to be a person of heart and humanity - because that?s where the life is, from the heart - or are you going to do whatever seems to be required of you by what might be called ?intentional power?"?
"Phantom Menace raises a different set of issues. Here?s Pepsi?s pitchman Hal Oates: "If you mail one of the Yoda cans back to us," he says on TV, "you?ll get a special collector?s check worth $20 - or you can hold onto the can for the future."
The next generation deserved better. Lucas has proven to be yet another sell-out and spin-meister, his hypocritical posturing collapsing under the weight of Toys ?R Us royalties and inter-galactic pizza.
Nicely written, Jon, but while I am WAY sick by the whole hype and commercialism myself, I think it is simply a corroboration of the old syaing that 'Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely'.
*ANY* Star Wars sequel would have such incredible hype to live up to, that it would be impossible to meet any expectations of the fans - couple that with the incredible, overwhelming runaway marketing in the interest of the allmighty $$$ these days, I believe it would be hardly possible for any of us to resist the temptation of being abused...
In the end, the proof will be in the pudding, or rather in the theatres. Either Lucas has provided content that his audience will accept, in that case all of the hype and marketing won't matter - or the movie will not do as well as expected (it will still make tons of $$$), and Lucas has the opportunity to do better in the next two.
In the end, one thing to consider is that all of us were much younger when we saw Star Wars, and most of us have grown up in the interim - this comes, unfortunately, with other expectations and points of view.
Lucas points out, repeatedly, that his movies are for kids. *WE* were kids when we saw Star Wars, and what kids like, or how to present it to them HAS changed in the past 20 years.
We *WANT* Star Wars to feel as fresh when we see TPM as when we saw Episode IV, but, sadly, that simply won't happen. The best we can hope for is to get back in touch with that 14 year old in the back of us, and enjoy the ride.
Harry
harry@spotfans.com
I, for one, admire Bill Gates. Getting to the point in his career where he can lay down the rules to the IT machine; dictating what standards users must adhere to in order to use his software; maintaining tight control over his licenses.
It is an envious position to be in. But I don't wish I were him. I don't know why.
AC
With regard to the merchandising, you can't make the comparison between the old Star Wars, the new Stars Wars, or even Titanic. When the original Star Wars came out, there was no precendence. It was a low-budget movie, and they barely finished the movie. You can't tell me that there were no product tie-ins with ROtJ, what with all the Ewoks 'n stuff. And how are you going to merchandise Titanic? Your very own sinking ship?? It's completely different. James Cameron had to gave up his directing share of the profit because he is using someone elses' money. Lucas used his own money to bankroll the entire project. He has every right to sell merchandise from the movie in any way he sees fit. Notice that commercials for the product tie-ins did not appear until May. A typical Disney hype begins almost and entire YEAR before with product tie-ins and posters/poster boards in movie theaters. Phantom Menace posters were only available from their web site, and poster boards did not appear in movie theaters 'till well after the 2nd trailer came out.
I am sure there will be those who says all the restrictions on the actors to talk about the movie, and the tight control he exhibits over ever aspect of the movie is aimed at generating hype. Perhaps. But that's just one point of view. It could also be seen as a man trying to do the right thing, and not ruin his own vision.
That whole bit about technology. If Lucas had completed the movies as they were, why bother with a 2nd edition? Obviously it was because he never did put his vision into the original movie. Now that he can, he utilizes all that is within his power to make the vision come true. Technology corrupts, but only if you become dependent on it. Vader became completely dependent on it, but Luke still uses technology as much as he can. So does Lucas. He is not selling out to technology, he is making sure he can tell the story the way he wants it to be told. Only in this way can his dream be fully fulfilled.
AC
Re: 'Discovering' a movie - I always like that. When you go to see something a friend said was pretty good and come out knowing that only a few of you (so far) know about it. Unfortunately, movies are now positioned as 'sleeper hits' - to try and capitalise on this. No longer will a movie be released to an unsuspecting market place, it'll be marketed as 'unknown'.
Perhaps it'll drive more people into art-house cinemas, where they can rediscover plot, characterisation, and genuinely innovative moviemaking.
I'll stop short of a call to boycott 'The Phantom Menace' (hell, I'm still going to see it when it finally opens in the UK) but if I keep hearing 'it's the movie of the millenium' (another pet peeve - the cinema is only just over 100 years old) I might wait for the next millenium.
In the meantime, go see something arty. It won't hurt you, and it'll give you something to think about.
Liked this comment? Why not buy me something nice
A few notes on selling out:
1) Usually, selling out involves blatantly
reversing one's previously stated position.
2) Selling out (if we must use that term) always
includes not only a change in one's public persona,
but altering one's art to fit someone else's
ideas.
Now, let's take Lucas. I see nowhere in Katz's
article where he cites Lucas explicitly stating
that he will not do promotions with fastfood
places, etc. This is all based on incredibly vague
implications as seen by Katz about the "myth" of
Star Wars, and the assertion that somehow these
things that have nothing to do with the movie
itself degrade the quality of the art.
Of course, none of this can be backed up by
pointing out examples in the actual movie, as
we haven't seen it yet. But Jon Katz still feels
the need to make blatantly ignorant statements
on the subject and defile a man whose work in the
past has been impeccable. I'll admit that I tend
to find Jon Katz's writings rather puerile and
generally foolish, this kind of attack on someone's
character shocks even me.
--
Kevin Doherty
kdoherty+slashdot@jurai.net
Kevin Doherty
kdoherty+slashdot@jurai.net
argh. you make me sick with your anger. how can you become so enraged at these people? they certainly aren't hurting anything, and they certainly aren't hurting you personally. i can't comprehend the source of your intensity on this issue. you claim these people have been brainwashed. they must have brainwashed themselves, because there hasn't exactly been a glut of pre-release hype for this film. these people are big fans of star wars, what exactly is your problem with that? and then you go on to say that this "hype engine" producing the phantom menace could be used to endorse racism or genocide? poppycock, i say, that is pure conjecture, and such a leap of logic that i can't even comprehend how you came to such a conclusion. again, lucasfilm has not been overhyping this film. a few trailers, a few posters is all i've seen from them. the fans are zealous, because they care about this movie. who are you to point at them and say "don't care about that!"? i think you need to take a look at why these little things get you so incensed, and maybe try some breathing excersizes to calm down, or something to that effect.
I'm so sick of the hype. I mean, how much more shameless can you get than having taco bell, and the KFC guy in a star wars commercial. Really now, it's blindingly obvious the reality won't live up to the hype, and millions of geeks will try to cram in may 19th to see.. a movie.
This isn't a life-altering event, this isn't going to solve world hunger, promote peace on earth and good will towards men.. it's a movie.
I'll go see it after everybody else has. I won't be there at midnight listening to a bunch of 13 year old kids cheering whenever Yoda appears on the screen, and throwing popcorn arond. No, I'm going to enjoy it with a group of my friends well after all those people are done trashing the place. And it'll be a better experience for me as well.
--
OK. Jon makes some valid points about the whole Star Wars Saga(tm) and it's deep meanings, it's effect on us all, and for that I'll give him a little credit....
Mr. Lucas himself has stated several times that Lucasfilm *itself* has purposely kept the hype down to a minimum, on *their* end. And I would tend to agree that there could have been a LOT more hype. I don't think the hype surrounding this movie has been any worse than that accompanying, say, "Jurassic Park" or "Toy Story" or even "The Flintstones" a few years ago. The difference being that they all faded away into oblivion, whereas Star Wars will be remembered for years to come.
Now, back to the hype. The licensees and the news shows are the ones creating most of the hype out there. What have we seen from LFL? A couple of trailers, a few low-key, and sparsely played TV spots, and a music video. Meanwhile, Hasbro has saturated the Toy Stores, the Pizza/Taco/KFC trinity is lambasting us w/ their stuff....blame them, if you're going to blame anyone.
And re: the fans and their 'droid'like tendencies to worship rather than expand Star Wars in their own ways....There *are* plenty of fan-written chapters out there, have been for years. There is fan-art aplenty....etc, etc. And after all, why mess with perfection?
This ripping-on-the-fans stuff in the media as of late is getting old real fast. Now you've joined those ranks me friend.
Blech. Signatures.
Alright, I've stayed out of the Katz-flaming to date, but this one takes the f*cking cake.
Katz, in short,
WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?
How can you possibly put the previous Star Wars films up on some kind of holy pedestal, seemingly oblivious to any sort of "hype"...
Where WERE you 18 years ago, my friend? Were you on some far flung corner of the MOON? Were you not present for the many Burger King Glasses, the infinite toys, the Star Wars Popsicles, the T-shirts...WHERE WERE YOU?
This is NOTHING new!!!! Go find Mr. Peabody and jump in the old wayback machine to circa '79 or '80 when the hype was in full force. Hell I was only 8 or so then, and *I* remember it being all-consuming. It so consumed the passions of this entire country that the 'product' was in demand enough to warrant said 'product.'
This article is nothing but pure, sheer ignorance and inflammability, whether on purpose or out of true ignorance, I can't say. Sure you're right about SW being the 'modern myth' yadda yadda boom boom...and I agree fully.
BUT...don't try to tell George about how his artistic integrity is somehow violated because there are action figures and coloring books w/ his movies' marque on them. He'll be the first to tell you, while yes it is a modern myth, etc. etc., it's also just a Saturday afternoon serial....
....And every kid wants his Red-Ryder BB gun....
Blech. Signatures.
I remember seeing the original Star Wars movie in the theater.
I was living in Minneapolis when it came out and the St. Louis Park Cinema had an area exclusive on it.
This was almost the last hurrah for that theater, which was a grand and gigantic one screen movie theater of the old fashioned kind.
It had a humongeus curved "surround" screen that had been designed for "Cinerama" moves (the type shown by three projectors at once). A thick gold glittery curtain slowly parted to reveal the screen as the movie started.
I did think that Star Wars was perhaps the best movie I had ever seen.
The St. Louis Park Cinema closed a year or two later, run out of business by the multi-screen cineplexes at the malls.
Now, all these years later, "The Phantom Menace" is about to debut. I'm sure it will be an enjoyable movie, and I intend to catch it within it's first few days out. But, I truly never thought I would live to see such hyperbole and hysteria over any movie.
To those who have been camping out for the last three or four weeks to get a ticket, I'll be about the millionth person the scream at you: "IT'S A FSCKING MOVIE FOR CRISSAKES!"
By definition, anyone who has nothing better to do than to sleep in a tent on a sidewalk for weeks on end just so they can make sure to see the very first presentation of a FSCKING MOVIE at their local cineplex has no bloody life whatsoever, period!
After this mythical "first showing" at hundreds of theaters nation wide, I'm sure that I will have no problem calling the automated ticket sales phone line of my local mega-cinema ("The Palace" here in New Orleans), and scarf me a couple o' tickets to a showing on the second, third, or fourth day. No big deal, and I'm happy.
The fact that there are so many people out there willing to dedicate weeks of their life to camping out to ensure they see that "first show" indicates just how the masses can be brainwashed by hype and effective advertising. In a very real sense, this is scary. Individual independent thinking is apparently a rare commodity in today's society. Suppose the hype engine that is producing the "Phantom Menace" hysteria were to be used to sell the masses on some sort of race hatred or ethnic cleansing campaign? Think about it.
Since there are so many people willing to get this worked up over a FSCKING MOVIE however, I really can't say I blame Lucas et. al. for milking them for all they're worth!
On the contrary, Mr. Katz. I'd like to offer the view that "The Phantom Menace" is nothing other than the biggest independent film ever made. Note that Lucas personally put up the $115 million to make the film: no studio money. This gave Lucas complete artistic freedom to do whatever he wanted. This is normall the realm of art/independent film makers, people too independent to tow to the studio line. Lucas is so wealthy from his success that he can afford to blow off the studios, and make exactly what he wants.
Look at this as a brave new experiment in film: the very first time that 9 digits of money was spent on a film totally under the control of an imaginative film maker, instead of a gang of bankers and focus groups.
Crispin
-----
Crispin Cowan, Research Assistant Professor of Computer Science, OGI
NEW: Protect Your Linux Host with StackGuard'd Programs
http://www.cse.ogi.edu/DIS C/projects/immunix/StackGuard/
Support Justice: Boycott Windows 98
The original Star Wars movie didn't have any hype or toys before it opened...it was a small movie at the time and it didn't even get a premier! But after a few months when the movie took the world by storm, the toys, the bed linen, the product endorsements etc etc....took off like nothing before it!
But you seemed to have forgotten The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi. Both these movies were surrounded by incredible hype. The Empire Strikes Back was surrounded by the hype almost as much as Phantom Menace is. It was most anticipated movie ever made (the same sort of thing people have been saying about Phantom Menace).
What is the point of your article? Did Lucas sell out? Of course he did, and he'd be a fool not to! If he hadn't sold out 22 years ago with the original, we wouldn't be here today talking about the Phantom Menace...which he financed totally by himself.
What's the deal with you Katz? Your whole article reeks of hypocrisy and of the Rolling Stone magazine article submission guildlines (were they tell their writers to make sure they hate everything and slant it to make the artist look like they sold out because they were smart enough to make a buck).
Wow, you're so controversial! I hope you don't get paid by Slashdot for your articles...after all, you'd be a sellout!
--- "It's not enough that I succeed...everyone else must fail."