Sphere of Influence is very excited to be welcoming Jonathan Smith as a contributor. An extraordinarily talented individual, I am thrilled that Jonathan will be sharing his vast knowledge of media, culture and politics with Sphere of Influence.
In the coming weeks Jonathan will begin his first series of posts exploring the history and culture of military fashion, called A Violent History of Fashion.
The superhero genre is an American creation, like jazz and stripper poles, exemplifying American ideals, American know-how, and American might, a mating of magical thinking and the right stuff. (May Vanity Fair)
After Barack Obama was elected in November 2008, Hollywood saw the trend: This man would save America, from the economy, from foreign opinion, from war, from the Bush era. He would bring America back to its former glory.
After a decade of sorted superheroes flying across green screens with the greatest of ease, in 2009 and 2010 only two films from the superhero genre were released, Iron Man 2 and X-Men Origins: Wolverine. Both films were sequels; America didn’t need any new superheroes, we had Obama.
Now over two years into Obama’s term and things are changing. If you needed any other signs that summer is finally (almost, kind of) here, you only need to look at the swell of blockbusters hitting the screens. Johnny Depp with his raven locks and guyliner, took over the box office last weekend with the release of Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, but two weeks ago it was America’s superheroes who officially launched their summer tour. Thor, which has grossed over $145 million in the US since its May 6 release, is the first of four big-budget superhero films set for theaters this summer (X-Men First Class, June 3, Green Lantern, June 17, Captain America: The First Avenger, July 22).
Even more capes will be flashing across the big screen in 2012 with The Avengers, Superman: Man of Steel, The Dark Knight Rises, and The Amazing Spider-Man.
So what’s going on?
In almost every year since 2000, at least one film from the superhero genre has cracked the top 20 list of domestic box office grossers. The X-Men and Spider-Man franchises alone have grossed over $1.9 billion domestically, spanning across seven films.
Comparatively, however, the 2000’s were unable to capture a tone befitting the era, as the genre has done in the past. Superman ruled at the box office from 1978 until 1988, releasing four films in the franchise. The escalating Cold War and an economic crisis encouraged a country in distress to embrace the nationalistic timbre that defined Ronald Reagan’s presidency; Superman, with his ability to withstand bullets and leap tall buildings in a single bound, was an ideal guardian for America during the turbulent 1980’s.
As the last great enemy of the United States vanished with the dissolution of the Soviet Union, America became the world’s only remaining superpower, and in turn with the tide in 1989, Tim Burton would reboot Batman. A superhero who lacked any superhuman abilities, save perhaps his high intelligence, Batman a.k.a. Bruce Wayne, was a wealthy businessman-turned-vigilante fighting crime at night dressed as a bat, using an array of highly developed, tech-savvy weapons. Batman was symbolic of the abundant wealth and economic dominance of Wall Street and Silicon Valley throughout much of the 1990’s. In addition to America’s dark knight, Hollywood also created film versions of dark, morally ambiguous superheroes in The Punisher (1989), Spawn (1997), and Blade (1998).
But the post 9/11 America never found itself a consistent superhero; along with the X-Men and Spider-Man, Hollywood also gave us Hellboy, The Fantastic Four, Hulk, Ghost Rider, Chris Nolen’s take on Batman, another Superman, and Iron Man.
What makes 2011/2012 different is that, contrary to previous years when we saw the same characters over several films, only two of the upcoming superhero flicks are sequels, The Dark Knight Rises and Ghost Rider. The remainder are either brand new franchises or reboots, such as Captain America and Superman: Man of Steel.
In 2008, America thought it had found its hero. Now, however, it seems the “honeymoon” is over. Obama’s campaign of “hope” and “change” were stalled by reality, and despite the achievements he has made thus far — passing health care legislation, over-turning “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” and now the death of Osama bin Laden — people still can at most times only talk of his failures, such as the slow economic recovery, high unemployment, and unforthcoming closing of Guantanamo.
Obama couldn’t perform miracles or walk on water, and he couldn’t instantly pull America out of the hole it had dug for itself since 9/11, as so many had expected him to after they built him up during the campaign.
Perhaps the words of Commissioner Jim Gordon closing lines of The Dark Knight best describe the decline of Super-Obama: “he’s the hero Gotham deserves. But not the one it needs right now. And so we’ll hunt him. Because he can take it. Because he’s not our hero. He’s a silent guardian. A watchful protector. A dark knight.”
If you, like myself, have apparently been left behind in todays rapture, please enjoy this video of a three-toed sloth crossing the road to the tune of R. Kelly’s “I Believe I Can Fly.”
At least we’ll still have Youtube to entertain us in the coming months of hell on earth.
As much as it kills me to link to anything from Fox News, here is Jon Stewart’s appearance on Bill O’Reilly’s The O’Reilly Factor last night, “defending” the Obama Administrations choice to invite the rapper Common to the White House for a poetry reading last week.
As Stewart deftly pointed out — when he was able to get a word in – the “cop killers” Common celebrates, according to Fox, are not the defining points of the rappers career. Stewart went on to say that, “there is a selective outrage machine over here at Fox that pettifogs only when it suits the narrative that suits them.”
While Stewart’s words weren’t exactly shocking, it’s still nice to watch someone say it to their faces. You can almost see O’Reilly being boxed into an uncomfortable corner as Stewart compared Common’s raps to other works by artists Bono and Bob Dylan, who have in the past written lyrics about convicted murderers they felt were done a diservice by the American justice system. But O’Reilly basically just shuts that down by cutting the feed to move onto another segment of the interview.
May is a bittersweet month; in the nice weather I can eat lunch outside and avoid my least favorite subway stations by walking, but at the same time I have to say goodbye to the vast majority my favorite TV shows for nearly 4+ months (or indefinitely, RIP Chicago Code, we barely knew ye.)
Now the Glee kids are coming into town, stuff is happening on Bones (finally!), and as a sick reminder that I have only True Blood to look forward to in the coming months, the big four networks start to publicize their fall lineups by hacking down any under-performers and hyping pilot scripts in development.
But the biggest hit of the 2011/2012 season won’t be a sitcom or drama, like the newest J.J. Abrams venture or The Playboy Club on NBC (really NBC?).
It will be a reality show: The 2012 presidential elections.
As Benjamin Svetkey wrote about on EW’s PopWatch last week, despite the Republican’s weak field of candidates and President Obama’s return to awesomeness following the death of Osama bin Laden, the 2012 election still promises to be an entertaining one.
With this cast of characters how could America not be enthralled: Sarah Palin (and Tina Fey), Newt Gingrich, Mike Huckabee, Michele Bachmann, Ron Paul and anyone associated with the Tea Party, President Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, and of course, Donald Trump and that fox that lives on top of his head.
The 2008 elections were no doubt thrilling, with the candidates setting the bar high by poking fun at themselves on Saturday Night Live and appearing on everything from the national news programs in prime time to the The Daily Show with Jon Stewart and The Late Show with David Letterman. But America can do better.
November 6, 2012 is still 17 months away and there is plenty of time to comment on the dramas of the next presidential election, but with Obama already gearing up a new campaign, releasing not only his long form birth certificate but a video of his actual birth (which we can all thank The Donald for), and Newt announcing his candidacy via Twitter, there is no question that the 2012 election promises to be the stuff of Hollywood legend.
Following the success of the film M*A*S*H (1970), the war parody depicting life during the Korean War for a group of drafted doctors, was adapted for TV. When the show ended in 1983 after it’s eleven-year run, it was the most watched season finale of all time. M*A*S*H not only satirized the military and the American government, but various American personalities. Best example: Major Frank Burns. A wealthy, patriotic gun lover, the conservative doctor constantly bragged about having his own practice “back in the States,” quoted from the Bible, and quipped about his strict wife while having an affair with another major.
In the second season episode titled “The Chosen People,” the following exchange takes place in the operating room:
HAWKEYE: Frank, by a strange coincidence, the inhabitants of Korea communicate in Korean. It wouldn’t hurt us to speak their language.
FRANK: I speak American. And I can go any place in the world.
TRAPPER: We can have you packed in 20 minutes.
HAWKEYE: We’re living in Korea, Frank.
FRANK: Not me, fella! I’m part of the American military establishment. I eat in an American mess, I shop in an American Px. All I want to do is save these people and go home.
DR PAC: And we thank you from the bottom of our bomb craters.
Twenty three years after the last M*A*S*H aired, from the minds behind Saturday Night Live blossomed 30 Rock. Quirkier than M*A*S*H was ever allowed to be, 30 Rock not only pokes fun at the American conservative, but the American liberal as well. Like Frank Burns, the portrayal of characters on 30 Rock skirt the line between reality and fiction. Yes, some wealthy conservatives said President Obama could actually be from Kenya, but none have an invisible AMEX card or “whip pennies at the drum circle” in Central Park.
But what do these political portrayals accomplish?
The depiction of the extremes for comedic reasons makes the stereotypes all the more apparent to the viewer. In one of the most brilliant episodes of 30 Rock, “Brooklyn Without Limits,” we see Liz Lemon obsessing over how socially conscious her new jeans company is, only to discover it’s owned by Halliburton, while Jack tries to aid a conservative Tea-Party-esque politician, he realizes that someone who wants to put casino’s on the moon should not actually be elected to Congress.
Plus, we learn that Che Guevara’s great grandfather was Domingo Halliburton and liberals should really find someone else to wear ironically on t-shirts.
I will admit, up until last night I was under the impression that ABC’s sitcom Modern Family was the depiction of exactly that – a modern family. The show about three families, all related, one the traditional two parent/three children structure, another the marriage of an older man and a younger woman, and lastly the partnership between two men raising an adopted daughter. (Watch the preview here.)
The relationship between Sofia Vergara’s sexy, passionate Latina character and Ed O’Neill’s stoic American male provides a lot of laughs, while satirizing the stereotypes of each personality. The gay couple raises their daughter with love, perhaps overzealously so at times, and the representation of the “drama queen” gay man à la Will and Grace style is equally amusing. Check out the Lion King introduction ceremony below:
All this is fine, well and good, ABC has created another parody of family life in America while seemingly pressuring it’s viewers to accept non-traditional family structures. Some may feel Modern Family is pushing too hard to this end, posting videos on Youtube titled Modern Family: ABC’s homosexual propaganda show.
However, in a presentation for another class at The New School, a student pointed out that despite showing alternative lifestyle families in primetime, ABC has presented us with little more than a renovated version of Full House. The students explained that of the three families, only the traditional middle aged couple are shown in any sexual situations (the kids walk in on them). The other two couples are rarely seen even kissing. Also, it is the case that in all three families one parent stays home to raise the children while the other is the breadwinner.
I had come to the realization that Modern Family is only modern on the surface.
But I then asked myself, in America where the surface is often all we see, where the “widely held” perceptions are the means by which we understand reality, is this show modern enough?
I think the answer is yes. The stereotypes remain the source for much of the comedy, thus allowing us to be more aware of them, while the familial structures sneak by garnering more acceptance over time. There is a lot the creators of Modern Family could do to become a better representation of America’s more modern families, and hopefully in time they can do that, but until then perhaps another awkward Dad will have to do.