I recently read an article by J. Hoberman at The Guardian website in which he discusses Joss Whedon's The Avengers and it's relation to Hollywood and 9/11, most notably that Hollywood has somehow overcome its fear of the tragedy by literally destroying the island of Manhattan in the effects laden, bombastic finale in which our mismatched bunch of superheroes band together to repel alien invaders sent forth by Asgardian God of Mischief Loki.
Hollywood overcoming it fear of 9/11? Not really.
Hollywood cinema in the post 9/11 climate is a subject that has fascinated me for the last couple of years now. The response of the studios, through their output, thy way that audiences receive material and the way that filmmakers present that product to us is something that is intriguing and will no doubt be studied in future film studies classes all around the world.
In counter point to Mr. Hoberman's statement, I don't think that Hollywood has at all overcome its fear of the 9/11 tragedy. I don't think we can. Those images never get any easier no matter how many times we've seen them. If Hollywood had overcome such a fear then Manhattan would not have been destroyed by an alien invasion, but rather terrorists or a much more earthly residing invading army. The point being that as Mr. Hoberman points out, the terror in the streets of Manhattan in The Avengers is not caused by terrorism but precisely through "killer robots from space" in which our heroes play out a "non-stop cosmic battle cum-pinball game". It is precisely this point that shows that Hollywood yet overcome such a fear, that Mr. Hoberman proclaims it has done. The violence is fantastical, the enemy is not some religious fanatic, but rather an alien race from another world. Audiences just aren't ready for anything else…
The action, the destruction, the enemy even is so fantastical in it's design, caused by an alien race and superheroes that it is impossible to comprehend beyond that of the wonderful world of film and storytelling. A similar thing happened in the climax to last year's Transformers: Dark of the Moon, in which the city of Chicago was effectively laid to waste by an invading force, leveling buildings to the ground, slaughtering people in their thousands without mercy or regard. But of course this slaughter, this devastating destruction was caused, not by terrorists, but by alien robots who could transform into whatever they wish. This was not caused by terrorists or a human army, but an alien one, yet the destruction and imagery of falling buildings and debris laden streets was reminiscent of that of 9/11 much the same as Mr. Hoberman proclaims the same in The Avengers.
Audiences were able to accept this type of destruction precisely because it was giant robots who caused it. Giant robots who are so implausible that they can only exist on screen or as simply a child's toy. It is wholly unreal, it is fantastical, it is beyond real. Something that remains safe, because it resides in the safest parts of our imagination.
Indeed this sort of fantastical violence and action has been the trend in Hollywood blockbusters since 9/11, films choosing to remain in the fantastical, with audiences choosing to flock to the worlds of comic books and patriotic war movies than the more terrorist style action films that were produced in the 80s and 90s. Indeed it seems that more comic book movies have been made in the last ten years than ever before, primarily of course because that is exactly what audiences are choosing to spend their money on.
Back in the 90s, Hollywood action films such as Executive Decision, True Lies, The Siege, Air Force One etc were but a mainstay of the Hollywood blockbuster model. A dramatic situation, usually involving some sort of racially profiled enemy and/or terrorist threat in which needed to be thwarted by a smart talking super cop or everyday joe. The Siege for example features Islamic extremists waging a terrorist war on the city of New York, utilizing suicide bombers and the like resulting in young men of middle eastern descent being placed in designated internment camps by American authorities. A camp hugely reminiscent of one residing in Cuba. It's fascinating to watch that film today, and the striking, somewhat alarming similarities between that film's world and the world of immediate post 9/11 America. No doubt that a film such as that could never be made today, yet back then in 1998, but a mere three years before 2001, the film was a star vehicle for Denzel Washington and featured Bruce Willis as an army general who resorts to tortures to acquire the information he needs. Back then it was seen as mere entertainment, but now the situations are all too real. Surprisingly the film was a flop on release, yet according the the IMDB trivia page it was one of the most rented movies in America after 9/11.
In Executive Decision, the film features Islamic fundamentalists hijacking a commercial airliner with plans to use it as a weapon over US soil, and also a suicide bomber blowing himself up in a London restaurant. Once again, a film of Hollywood fantasy back then but now, situations that seem all too real in today's world. Two films that could no doubt be made today with the same gloss and sheen that Hollywood provides.
Even Die Hard 2 would probably have had to have undergone a fairly extensive rewrite if it were made today, with the film involving terrorists taking control of an airport and at one point, in order to prove their power, deliberately crash a plane. It's a devastating scene in itself but one that has not been seen in a Hollywood blockbuster since. The latest Die Hard movie, made in 2007, featured a mere cyber terrorist who was intent on destroying the financial stability of America rather than destroying buildings and crashing commercial airliners, although we did see John McClane surfing on the tail of a fighter jet. Plus today, Timothy Olyphant's terrorist really wouldn't have needed to go to extreme lengths to bring down the financial sector, but that's another issue altogether.
But since 9/11, Hollywood has been more prone to looking to the worlds of the fantastical for their blockbuster fix, namely comic books. Films such as Spider-Man and X-Men (Even though both were filmed prior) proved such a hit with audiences in the early noughties that studios have never looked back since, adapting comic book after comic book, raiding comic book stores to find the next big franchise. The grosses speak for themselves with these movies. Granted there are some flops in there but no-one can deny that comic book movies have become a mainstay of the summer season.
The reason for audiences desires for this is simple. The need for escapism. The action and villainy in these films are so outlandish that they present the new escapism for the post 9/11 audience. What better place to escape to than in the world of fantasy and comic book lore, where an ordinary teenage boy can become a iconic symbol with spider powers who defeats the bad guy, saves the world and gets the girl. These films allow us to escape precisely because they inhabit the world of the unreal. Michael Bay's Transformers trilogy has reveled in laying waste to cities in the US and around the world, but audiences accept this, why, because what is causing the destruction are giant fucking robots beating ten times of crap out each other. So out there, so fantastical, so escapist that audience know that nothing like can ever happen in reality and that these films can only exist in the safety of our imaginations.
Although this has backfired at times with films such as War of the Worlds and Cloverfield, both films drawing criticism for their obvious references to 9/11, using the tragedy to give their worlds a heightened sense of disturbing familiarity. Cloverfield especially, portraying a monster attack on New York City in the style of found footage, echoing 9/11, as people watched the disaster unfold through their numerous recording devices. The sense of reality and familiarity echoed in Cloverfield, obviously was too much for some at the time.
Even the more realistic action films such as The Bourne series features into the post 9/11 logic. In these type of films the enemy is not some international terrorist who wishes to blow up some landmark or unleash nerve gas upon an unsuspecting populace, but the US government itself or rather government authorities such as the CIA. This could be argued that this in fact a response to the negativity to the war in Iraq and general feeling towards the Bush administration of the time. It was less about the enemy out there than the enemy within.
Although television drama 24 seemed to ignore this logic and constantly used Islamic fundamentalists as an antagonistic force for hero Jack Bauer in a few seasons.
Even a classical action film such as this year's Expendables 2 can be deemed escapist because the attraction to that film is not the concept of a bunch of mercenaries but rather the nostalgic wish to see all our favorite action heroes who defended our western way of life in the 80s and 90s to come out of semi retirement and save us again from the evils of the world. They remind us of a better time when heroes were butch super hard men and where one man could truly make a difference and that no grey areas existed when it came to good and evil. Good was good, evil was evil, nothing in between.
What all these films do, all these superhero films, this resurgence of 80s and 90s action stars, is make us believe in heroes once again. We want to see heroes save us from the cataclysms that befall our world, defend us, come to our aid when we need them most. It's interesting to note that films in regard to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have had very little impact on the box office and the average moviegoer. Simply because they are too based in reality and most of them tend to relay the trauma of the war, showing the realities of soldiers lives upon returning and life out there. While admirable these films are and powerful as they may be, such as Oren Moverman's The Messenger, these films have largely been ignored by audiences (with a few exceptions) because they present a reality, a reality of soldiers as human beings traumatized by what they have seen, questioning exactly what they were fighting for in the first place. Films that are overtly political in their design which audiences have responded too by all but ignoring them, choosing instead to follow heroes with powers, charming rogue billionaire in suits of armor, asgardian gods, super soldiers, angry green rage monsters and men who dress up like bats stalking the villainy that prowl the streets at night. These are the heroes that people want to see and that people want to exist.
So does The Avengers prove that Hollywood has overcome its fear of 9/11. No. They are simply continuing a trend, a trend of superpowered men and women defending us from a fantastical threat that can only exist in the realm of fantasy and imagination.
Then again, all this may be transcended when Christopher Nolan delivers unto us the final chapter in his Batman saga…
Seriously someone should write a book on this subject… Oh wait somebody already has…
Here is the link to the original article, in case you're interested.
Thank you for your time….
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2012/may/11/avengers-hollywood-afraid-tackle-9-11?CMP=twt_gu
Like this:
Be the first to like this post.
