The Spectacle of Cinema

As a rule I try to stay calm and collected. This convention of control was breached the other day. After a couple years of cajoling my friend, Kiran, finally watched the inimitable Paul Newman in "The Hustler." A back and forth of messages ensued where I began a rant against the current state of cinema.

I'm not a fetishist for a supposed "golden age" of film. There have been countless productions in recent years that I love just as much as anything else produced in any other era. Despite this, I have a feeling that there's been an overall slide in quality.

The stimulus for this rant was both a remark Kiran made about "Pirates of the Caribbean II" (henceforth: POTCII) and my own recent viewing of "Step Brothers" with Will Ferrell and John C. Reilly. They play middle-aged men who still live with their parents. Despite the obviousness of the plot vehicle (parents marry, move in with child, fights and hijinks ensue) the movie's potential greatness lay within the satirization of the ever lengthening span of modern childhood. While this aping of the prorogation of adulthood has it's own comedic value, the bulk of the humor rested in the audience's ability to imagine the crass petulance of Ferrell and Reilly being acted out by actual children.

Perhaps it's obvious to note that the general plot and story arc were both formulaic. That, in and of itself, wasn't the spark of my rant. What I found in "Step Brothers"
was the continuing trend of Ferrell's absurdist brand of (crass) humor. A branch of comedy that no longer seems to place much importance on timing or wit. Instead it relies on the ability to say the most off the wall thing that pops into one's head. Though absurdism has its place, though I laughed quite a bit during the movie, I left with a feeling that I was perhaps perpetuating some larger problem in America by contributing to the success of that film.

The other side of this cinematic equation are spectacle films, like POTCII, Tristan & Isolde, National Treasure, or even Kingdom of Heaven. These movies place a priority on attention grabbing stunts as well as contrived romances and story lines. While there have certainly always been "spectacle" films, it seems that they've begun to dominate the entire action genre.

Throughout history there has always been a human urge for a spectacle. There are of course the obvious spectacles of past (gladiators) and present (modern sports) but what strikes me is the overall rise of the "spectacle" in our everyday life--from obsessive coverage of stars like Brittney Spears or Brett Favre to the rise of reality television and the explosion of movies like POTCII. This of course leads me down a dangerous thought path. It all makes me wonder if there is any correlation with the death, so to speak, of the "traditional" spectacles like traveling fairs. Or, could it be more about our own voyeuristic appetites? As the world continues to evolve, as it continues to shrink, as the ability of science grows, does our own craving for a spectacle apart from us expand?

In all likelihood the explanation can be simplified along lines of taste more than anything. Perhaps my own personality is reflected in my film tastes. Perhaps one's taste in movies is just a perverted manifestation of narcissism. I'm one for words and subtlety, thus I reject films that severely lack both. My lament to Kiran was that the popularity of these movies filled with spectacle and empty lines have come at a cost of finding movies like "The Hustler," ones that present a structured plot, intelligent dialogue, and well formed characters. These carefully crafted movies still exist. Being back home I quickly realized the unfortunate impossibility of ever seeing them in the theater. Put it down as another casualty of life in a smaller town. Put it down as another reason to be thankful for my Netflix subscription.