Hollywood’s Cyrstal Ball

Before I get back to the all-important most date-able TV characters list (soon, I promise!), I’d like to briefly dissect this ridiculous piece by Mike LaSalle.

He poses a question: Did the Hollywood films of 2008 predict the economic collapse of 2008? Instead of just answering “No” and moving on to something — anything — else, LaSalle wrote this:

It would be too neat to say that 2008’s movies explicitly anticipated the financial crisis, but a recurring theme of civic catastrophe haunted the year, repeatedly telling us that something wasn’t right, that things had spun out of control and that our institutions were on the brink of systemic failure.

How on earth is this theme unique to the films of 2008? Has LaSalle seen any other movie released, well, in any other year? His evidence:

This theme crossed genres and fueled movies of varying quality. “Eagle Eye” was a likable but silly action ride, in which an all-knowing computer creates havoc and comes within one second of wiping out the entire U.S. government. “Blindness” showed how helpless our society might be in the face of a sudden epidemic. “City of Ember,” a futuristic fantasy, depicted a postapocalyptic underground society, days away from collapse, run by greedy, shortsighted government officials. “WALL-E,” an animated postapocalyptic fantasy, depicted an Earth wiped out by pollution, in which survivors lived on a spaceship.

I can play this game too.  Live Free or Die Hard (2007) was a likeable but silly action ride, in which a human hacker creates havoc and comes within one second of wiping out the entire U.S. government. Children of Men (2006) showed how helpless our society might be in the face of a sudden epidemic.  V for Vendetta (2006), a futuristic fantasy, depicted a dystopian society run by greedy, shortsighted government officials.  Apocalypto (2006) depicted an entire civilization wiped out by pollution.

But LaSalle has more:

“Iron Man,” comparatively upbeat in this crowd, showed New York getting demolished by men in space suits.

I’m not entirely sure who the “men in space suits” are supposed to represent in LaSalle’s ridiculous fantasy-metaphor, but I am pretty sure I’ve seen New York City (and many other cities) getting destroyed in many, many other films preceding 2008, and those films did not magically predict economic collapse.  Sorry, people just like to see shit get blown up.  But in case LaSalle is entirely unaware of these other films, here are a few lists he may find useful.

The more pessimistic “Dark Knight” presented a city at the mercy of capricious nihilism – and, of equal importance, showed the corruptibility and fragility of the supposed good guys.

And?  And?  What does this have to do with your thesis, sir?

And this weekend, “The Day the Earth Stood Still,” about aliens who threaten to destroy the Earth if people don’t learn to live in peace, opened.

Actually the remake, from what I can gather from the trailer and reviews, has nothing to do with a plea for peace.  But even if it were, we’ve been in Iraq for five years now.  Does LaSalle think Hollywood has ignored the subject until now?  Of course, the remake is actually about global warming. I can only assume that LaSalle missed The Day After Tomorrow and An Inconvient Truth.

If only LaSalle could have ended here.  But no:

A second theme of 2008 recalled a recurring motif of early ’30s (that is, early Great Depression) cinema. This is the idea that differentiating right from wrong isn’t always easy, that morality is complicated, that life has lots of gray areas. The pervasiveness of this theme is in contrast with a few years ago, when right was right and wrong was wrong, and there wasn’t anything to think about. Like the civic-disaster theme, the notion of moral complexity cut across genres this year and was present in movies good and bad – from the poisonous nonsense of “Wanted,” about contract killers who kill only “bad” people, and then start wondering who’s really bad; to popular entertainment such as “Twilight,” about a nice vampire.

Life has gray areas?  Praise the Lord for this great revelation by the Hollywood films of 2008!  (And if he really means that Hollywood films offerred no moral complexity a few years ago, I strongly suggest LaSalle take a look at the five Oscar nominees for Best Picture in 2005.)

Ridley Scott made “Body of Lies,” an espionage story in which there were bad guys and tainted guys, but no good guys. “Frost/Nixon,” newly released, is an incisive but sympathetic look at two flawed men. And “Doubt,” also newly released, sums up this year’s theme in its title: It’s the story of a crime that maybe never happened.

As in those first years of the 1930s, the current cinema’s sudden interest in moral complexity suggests a culture that has been shocked into shedding its radiant self-delusions – one that’s ready to start doing some serious soul-searching. So, of course, no one wanted to see “Rambo,” even a Rambo who was a little more depressed. That’s a character from a different era, not just in terms of time but of mind-set.

Nevermind that Rambo actually outgrossed Body of Lies, both domestically and abroad.  Or that Syriana was released in 2005 to wider popular and critical acclaim than the similar Body of Lies.

It’s not unreasonable to think that our movies also forecast Obama as a done deal, long before they called Ohio and long before the debates. As in the ’30s, we had civic anxiety and moral complexity in our movies, and yet another early-’30s parallel – mainstream films whose overt political content suggested a change in the offing. “Stop-Loss” dealt with the unfair practice of making Iraq War veterans serve multiple tours of duty. And Oliver Stone’s “W.” was the most searing presentation of a sitting president that has ever been made. (It was no “PT 109.”) Equally telling was the box office implosion of “An American Carol,” a politically conservative comedy with a cast of famous actors. It has made $7 million so far. Would it have failed so spectacularly in 2004? I doubt it.

An American Carol “imploded” at the box office because it only grossed $7 million.  But no mention that Stop-Loss only grossed $10 million because it “dealt with” an important political issue?

As for the moviegoing climate of 2004, Fahrenheit 9/11 was a huge hit.  So what’s your point?  Maybe, as it looks, An American Carol is just a terrible, terrible movie.  But obviously the quality of the films discussed, not to mention the quality of the argument, isn’t important to the armchair political scientist who somehow managed to get this paragraph published in a major American newspaper:

In 1932, the combination of fear and inner questioning resulted in a political upheaval, the election of Franklin Roosevelt. I believe a case could be made (but I’d have to research it further) that this same combination preceded the Republican realignment of 1980, which brought in Ronald Reagan. (The point being, fear and inner questioning are not ideological but are the components of a change in mind-set.) In 2008, this combination resulted in a decisive win for Barack Obama.

I believe a case could be made (but I’d have to research it further) that Mike LaSalle has no idea what he’s talking about.