Spider-Man, Star Wars and the Power of Myth 529
Like Star Wars, Spider-Man has the classic elements of a successful myth. A typically American story, it's less pretentious and hyped than Star Wars and more accessible to kids and die-hard comic book buffs, who remember the great, golden age of Marvel Comics. I'm one of them, I was there.
The old form still has legs. One film analysts told the Wall Street Journal last week that with the success of Spider-Man, the blockbuster bar has been raised. In fact, he said, this movie has changed Hollywood's perception of what a blockbuster is. That makes it interesting for George Lucas, next up at your local megaplex.
It's tough to explain, in the age of cable, gaming, the Net and the Web, just how central comics were for years to a culture of brainy, nerdy, alienated pre-Net teenage boys. Now, hostile jerks can flame people on the Net. Before, they could only read sci-fi books, build model planes and erector sets, but mostly, feast on comics and dream of becoming more powerful.
In the 21st century, they can download, program and game, but in the 50s and 60s, comic books and rock-and-roll were prominent among the few accessible forms of popular culture for individualists with brain cells, a cheap, simple pleasure that cost a dime, then a quarter. How shockingly primitive when compared to the world of the computer nerd or hacker.
Mainstream culture was dull, religiously appropriate and homogenized. Comic books and rock music were rebellious, subversive and naturally came under murderous fire from parents, teachers and politicians.
Before, they could only read comics and fantasize about becoming more powerful. Elaborate ratings systems and restrictive codes eventually suffocated the comics' angry, biting spirit and made them as bland as network TV -- a cultural loss and free-speech outrage heading soon to a computer near you -- but not before Marvel and other comic creators cranked out some classic yarns, from Spider-Man and Batman to the X-Men and other superheroic tales.
What makes these stories so popular and enduring? Perhaps because they all embody certain themes. There's the split-personality hero, usually a nerd who acquires great powers but at enormous cost, who always gets something and loses something. He gets to zip along past New York City skyscrapers, for instance, but we know he isn't likely to end up with the girl. Or, he lives in a mansion and drives a Batmobile, but he's depressed and lonely. Or he's a mutant wolverine with fingers of steel who can't ever have a casual beer with his pals.
He cherishes his powers, but we know he can't ever be comfortable with his life. Robert Kane's early Batman: The Dark Knight was disturbingly dark and angry before the moralists turned comic books to bland mush. Few people remember that Kane ended his first Batman series with our hero giving up on life and essentially committing suicide by turning himself into the famed Arkham Asylum, where villains from the Joker to the Riddler were being held.
Stories like Spider-Man and Batman also have a uniquely American and, until September 11, old-fashioned sense of civics. Spider-man's motto is "With great power comes great responsibility, " a bizarre notion even to hackers. Wouldn't that have seemed clunky before the terrorist attacks? Now it has a certain resonance.
Batman's Bruce Wayne, along with the Superhero stars and any number of X-Men, never shirk their duty to the public, even though the fickle populace is sure, at some point, to turn on them. No matter how tempted, they are, they do what they're supposed to do.
The late teacher and mythologist Joseph Campbell wrote that myth was still one of the powerful forces in the world. The origins and power of myth are still central, from the comic book lover to the hacker. The success of revived yarns like Stan Lee's Spider-Man, while they rarely seem to take themselves as seriously as their fans take them, is amazing, and proves his point. We seem to constantly be turning backwards to myths for inspiration and entertainment, while we are busy making the myths of tomorrow but don't really know which ones will take.
The Spider-Man story is pretty basic, especially when compared to the lumbering twists and turns of Star Wars: wimpy outer-borough kid contracts enormous powers, learns to use them wisely and well, faces terrible danger, sacrifices much.
Peter Parker isn't as deep as the Skywalker brothers and Uncle Ben is no Obi-Wan. But as the box office receipts demonstrate, the writers at Marvel comics have held their own when it comes to myth-making. Sometimes, simpler is better.
Huh? (Score:3, Informative)
Isn't it rated PG-13 vs. Star Wars' PG ratings?
Re:Huh? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Huh? (Score:2)
Re:Huh? (Score:2)
Star Wars likely would have recieved a pg-13 rating if it were made later, due to the violence.
Re:Huh? (Score:2)
As a kid I could sit through an entire novel. My attention span is shot as an adult. After the MTV-raped teen age, I can't get even 1/2-way through a comic book now.
Skywalker...brothers? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Skywalker...brothers? - yes (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Skywalker...brothers? - yes (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Skywalker...brothers? (Score:2, Funny)
And you don't want to know what's revealed in Episode 8. All I can say is Solo and Leia better not have got to first base yet...
Only Stan Lee's Spider-man? (Score:2, Informative)
What makes (Score:2, Insightful)
The answer is simple: advertising.
JonKatz, if you looked around you would have seen how much advertising and tie-ins there were to these movies.
I do not think they in any way qualify as modern myth. Something more likely to have that honour is `Lord of the Rings' (the book, not the movie! I hated the movie).
Re:What makes (Score:2)
Superman goes back to pre-WW II. Batman and Spider-Man go back decades. (I'm not a comic buff -- if I've got these wrong, someone just say so.) Their original and enduring popularity has nothing to do with fast food tie-ins.
You may be right about the movies (although the great adavantage about comic/TV/video game based movies is that there's less need for advertising because of the existing fan base and recognition) but the original stories' poularity had little to do with marketing.
Same with Star Wars, by the way.
Re:Comic origins (Score:2)
Nonsense (Score:5, Insightful)
I went to see Spider-Man because I've loved the character since I was a kid. I've since recommended the movie to anybody who wants to know because I liked it. Yes, Spider-Man was heavily advertised. None of that made any difference to me.
Obviously advertising can make a big difference in the popularity of a product, but if you would bother to read any Advertising 101 textbook you'll find out that advertising is most effective for differentiating products that have litle difference. That's why there's so much advertising for laundary detergent: they're all the same. Movies may appear to be very different to movie fans, but in terms of consumer perception movies are almost a commodity: they are one of several options for a weekend's entertainment. Lucas could have done no advertising whatsoever for AOTC and all the Star Wars fans would have still showed up with their plastic light sabers, but the general public who simply want to know what to do for a date or some time with the kids would have ignored it.
(There are also other intentions for advertising besides product differentiation. Insert standard AIDA lecture here.)
So now I put the question back to you: you've spent your money on products before. Do *you* only buy products because of advertising? If not, whty do you assume everyone else is an advertising drone?
Re:What makes (Score:2)
Re:What makes (Score:2)
The answer is simple: advertising."
I think it is even simpler than that: globalism.
Re:What makes (Score:2, Insightful)
Wrong (Score:5, Informative)
.
You really think so, Katz? (Score:3, Interesting)
That's a bet I'd take.
Re:You really think so, Katz? (Score:2)
You'd probably lose.
Spiderman set records for biggest weekend take ever. Also, Ep2 is opening on fewer screens. Also, I think it's safe to say there's much less buzz for Ep2 than Ep1.
Re:You really think so, Katz? (Score:2)
I wasn't aware that Spiderman opened on more screens than AOTC will. I have to admit that surprised me.
Re:You really think so, Katz? (Score:2)
Just let it be for @!$%#^&@ sake! (Score:5, Funny)
Perhaps you can learn a bit from Ben Parker: "With great power comes great responsibility".
Now how about adapting that to more meaningful journalism, instead of trying to over analyze everything.
Re:Just let it be for @!$%#^&@ sake! (Score:5, Insightful)
I've been pondering over the recent success of Spider-Man myself after my review of the movie, and realized that one of the reasons that Spider-Man was so popular was because of the "geek hero" ethos that he personifies.
There's a certain pull to it. Everyone has felt like an outsider at some point (to greater or lesser degrees), everyone has felt powerful in some area that no one else it - and everyone has felt the tug of conflicting interests.
Movies like Spider-Man taps into that, and gives it a voice. It shows that sometimes, no matter how cool you are, you'll still be the outsider - and that's OK.
So I actually enjoyed reading Mr. Katz comments on the movie and the mythos behind it. Good to know I'm not the only person who "gets" the underlying theme of the movie (even if it is pretty campy at times.)
Re:Just let it be for @!$%#^&@ sake! (Score:2)
Although you don't wish to put the pieces of this puzzle together, I do. Although I don't necessarily agree with all of Katz's assertions (Skywalker isn't really that complicated, he's just the focus of an ornate version of the death-and-transfiguration hero myth -- compare to Theseus and the Minotaur, esp. w/r/t the Minotaur's conception), I appreciate that Katz is making an effort to figure out the world around us and sharing his work.
I enjoy the study of humanities, and don't appreciate your comments which suggest we should all just shut-up and avoid discussion of where we are and what we are doing. Since most of life occurs within a social context (even when you're home alone), public discussion of myth, religion, and science has merit as we try to divine truth.
-Paul Komarek
As Freud said: (Score:2, Insightful)
Well.... (Score:2)
When considering the fact that unless my sources are mistaken Spiderman made MORE money on opening weekend than Episode One (in fact I heard that Spidy set some records) and there is MUCH LESS hype about Episode 2 than Episode One I think that might just be a somewhat safe bet.
Joseph Campbell & George Lucas (Score:3, Funny)
Salon [salon.com] had an interesting editorial presenting
a different perspective, suggesting that Star Wars had
its roots in sci fi fiction rather than grand myths.
Check it out, it's a worthwhile read.
-- Martini
Re:Joseph Campbell & George Lucas (Score:3, Flamebait)
It is SO GOD DAMN OBVIOUS that the Star Wars films were based on pulp sci-fi writings that it hurts my head every time someone (Katz) tries to aggrandize the entire meaning of the film. IT'S FUCKING ENTERTAINMENT, KATZ - NOT A DISCOURSE ON THE MEANING OF LIFE. Why must their be a "deeper meaning" to the films? What drives idiots like Katz to search for it? What's the FUCKING POINT?
So what if some idiot (probably katz) put the idea into Lucas' head, only to watch him run with it? That doesn't make it true. I mean, seriously...the type of movies that are rehashes of classical mythology usually end up like O Brother Where Art Thou [imdb.com] - grossly misunderstood by the masses, but generally liked by those with enough scruples to find out what the film is actually about. Star Wars had far too much mass appeal, and a plot that was far more generalized.
Overall, the only argument i've seen in favor of the Star Wars/Campbell relationship is that they both deal with "the eternal struggle between good and evil". Name two movies that DON'T deal with that struggle, and maybe I'll believe you, Katz.
Re:Joseph Campbell & George Lucas (Score:3, Insightful)
It seems to me that every great story has "deeper meaning", whether you like it or not, because it reaches for the "universal", that which is shared by all of us. In the best SW film to date, Empire Strikes Back, that deeper meaning was that each holds the seed to evil within itself, and that greed, ambition, wrath and general egotistical behavior lead the way to the dark side. That's actually very close to a buddhist viewpoint, and I wouldn't be surprised if Lucas consciously put that in - not to mention the fact that "the Force" as described by Yoda (the archetype of the old eastern sage) is strikingly similar to the Tao as described by Chuang Tzu.
I don't understand your hostility. The fact that there is some deeper meaning, one which has already been covered in ancient myths (they nearly all have!) to a work of art does not take away from it's entertainment value. I personally thing it adds to it, even when the filmmaker isn't consciously aware of its presence.
Re:Joseph Campbell & George Lucas (Score:2)
br
Let's face it...Lucas is not the creative genius that some people want to think he is...he's a good director, and he can tell a story. Unfortunately, it's not really a very original or deep story - but it's entertaining nonetheless.
Re:Joseph Campbell & George Lucas (Score:2)
To me, Empire was an appropriately "deep" story...it just so happens that it's also the best of the original 3 SW films.
Re:Joseph Campbell & George Lucas (Score:2)
Hate Katz all you want... (Score:5, Interesting)
A quick glance over his last 20 stories [slashdot.org] show an avergae of 370 comments per story, his top three garnering 1021, 713 and 633. This man walks right behind the fury of the anti-MS brigade.
Strange thing is, Katz is universally (face it, Slashdot is our universe) abhorred, belittled and flamed week after week, yet remains gainfully(?) employed by Slashdot, and continues to pull in the page views.
In summation, the perfect troll. ;)
Batman is DC (Score:2, Informative)
Marvel: X-Men, Spiderman, Hulk
DC: Batman, Superman, Justice League
Almost a given (Score:5, Insightful)
Incidentally, there is concern in the press that Spider-Man may peak too early because it opened on so many screens; however, I'm sure it was intentional, as they knew they had to make as much money as possible in the two weeks before AOTC opened.
Re:Almost a given (Score:2)
The stats in question only account for theatre box office monies, nothing about rentals, purchases, or how many individual people have actually SEEN the film. Which is the only true measure of success I'd imagine.
And fewer screens for EP2 means a higher density of idiots. Blah. (Disclaimer: I DID camp out for the re-issues of 4-6 and for Ep1 so I have first hand knowledge of the crowds =P)
Re:Almost a given (Score:2)
Re:Almost a given (Score:2, Insightful)
My reaction as I read Jon's piece. (Score:5, Funny)
"Oh great, another JonKatz rant..."
After the first paragraph or two though, I began to think:
"Hm, maybe Jon gets a bad rap too much, this actually makes a bit of sense."
Then he started tying in the net and how script kiddies are today's version of comic book readers:
"Well, he started off well, this is kind of a little out-there, but I'll cut him some slack."
Then he starts talking about the post-9/11 meaning of sci-fi:
"Forget it, this guys a twit. I shouldn't have even started reading it."
Moral of the story: Jon can write pretty well if he wants to. Not everything has to deal with 9/11 though or about the alienation of nerds and geeks.
Well, he writes about another thing too (Score:3, Funny)
He writes about Columbine too! Well, ok that is covered by the alienation thing but it IS a different event
You give him too much credit (Score:3, Insightful)
The clock has been stopped at T + 7 days (Score:2)
We all hoped too soon.
Not batman, nor spiderman (Score:2)
FlameBait (Score:2, Funny)
Can you moderate a post as Flamebait?
Tell me that throwing this into a nerd discussion isn't like throwing raw steak into a den of hungry lions
Plagarism? (Score:2)
From the New York Times review:
---
Like weary Brezhnev-era Muscovites, the American moviegoing public will line up out of habit and compulsion, ruefully hoping that this episode will at least be a little better than the last one, and perhaps inwardly suspecting that the whole elephantine system is rotten.
---
Very interesting..
Re:Plagarism? (Score:2)
If an author uses a sufficiently unique word or phrase or passage in a particular context, reusing that word or phrase or passage, in the same context, without citing the original work or author, constitutes plagiarism.
.period.
Betting Against StarWars AOTC? (Score:2, Interesting)
Spider-man's springboard was an comic which has it's glory days in the past (comic sales are lower than decades past, probably due to computers, video games, etc.) and an incredibly inane and plodding newspaper strip. That it's done so well most likely speaks volumes (largely ignored in Hollywood) at the value of producing family entertainment. I'm old enough to remember when 'R' rated films only came through town once in a while, now they're usually 50% of what's showing, if not more. Even PG-13 stuff can be pretty awful, so when the old web slinger hit the screens it was a safe bet that kids would be there, most of the viewers in the lines I saw were of the ankle-biter variety. Lasting power, of course remains to be seen.
Re:Betting Against StarWars AOTC? (Score:2, Interesting)
I felt major burn from Jar Jar, and the rest of the movie. That movie was crap. I was a huge Star Wars fan until EP1. I'm less of a fan now. I just turned down midnight tickets, but I will see it in the theaters, just not for a few weeks.
Katz, Katz, Katz (Score:5, Funny)
Obviously, you're talking out of your ass again. Wolvie has adamantium claws and frequents bars quite often, usually enjoying a brewsky or two. Hell, he's Canadian and if you don't drink at least two beers a day, they'll deport your ass faster than you can say "Hockey Night in Canada".
Nothing to see here, move along.
Re:Katz, Katz, Katz (Score:3, Informative)
Wolvie's real power is his Mutant Healing Factor, which is what allowed the Weapon X program to implant the adamantium in the first place.
Go read Peter Pan (Score:2)
Sexual jealousy
Murder
Envy
Revenge
Paranoia
Domina
Repressed Homoeroticism
Oedipus complex
Rock On !!
Re:Go read Peter Pan (Score:2)
Gotta give props to Tom Lehrer....
Hostile jerks? (Score:2)
Oh please! Like you have any experience with that!
And I am not sure what people are talking about on the marketing stuff. I tried to get Voice Stream first because I think Jamie Lee Curtis is HOT! She turned me down, so I have Cingular on the VisorPhone now. Just check my journal [slashdot.org].
Warning! Don't read any Joseph Campbell: (Score:2, Interesting)
Anybody why even glibpses a page of Mr. Campbell's PBS-style writings starts seening everything in tems of myth. "The milk being poured into my fruit-loops is like the story of the Hero's of Yore who travel on an Adventure, only to come back to a decimated homeland"
The guy had a cerain nack of getting grants to do his "craft", I'll give him that, but his readers rank up there with readers of and Ayn Rand and Chompsky, they start to see everything in terms of their favorite new book.
Re:Warning! Don't read any Joseph Campbell: (Score:3, Informative)
Yep, too much cofee already make my spelling even worse. Mr. Chomsky has a lot of interesting ideas, if you are only familiar with his linguistics then you are missing out on a lot of good mind material. I have a lot of respect for Noam's honesty in politics - but I wish he would spend more time in proposing solutions rather than just bash my culture. He repetidly make the clasic error of assuming that identification of a problem is the same as fixing it, and unfortuntatly he has collected enough groupies around him that parrot every word of his - so I doubt he'll change, unless he get a mind altering infection of the brain. Oh well.
(run-on sentance ballanced with a terse one)
Calling all Chomsky Parrots... (Score:2)
He repetidly make the clasic error of assuming that identification of a problem is the same as fixing it
Chomsky's ideas on how to fix it have always been there: stop the lies and duplicity in the government, hold yourself to the same standards you hold everyone else to, and never never never suspect for one meager moment that you will get away with your crimes. It is strange to see mention on Chomsky's name on a posting about pop culture and movies, but Chomsky definitely deserves a place in theYeah, this pretty much was a rant, but thought some of this b.s. should have been labelled as such.....
Re:Calling all Chomsky Parrots... (Score:3, Insightful)
Just as a sugestion: look at Ralph Nader. I find Ralph Nader not only to be more inteligent than Noam, but more effective. That's my problem with Chomsky - he just likes to tear things down, and blame his inefectivness at communicating on conspiricies and the grand spectre of the "Corporate-Boogy-Man."
Raplh, bless his little heart, gets thing done. I don't agree with him a goodly amount of the time, but he has my respect, and I wish more people were like him. Ralph also is a happy soul - he smiles, makes jokes and doesen't take things too seriously, Chomsky is a sour old house-frau by compaison, and people pick up on this. People like joyfull people by nature. Oh well:off to get more cofee. (Ralph whould be proud: Shade grown, fair-trade cofee)
PS: If you like cofee, get some Sahde-Grown, organic, fair-trace cofee even if you don't give a rat's ass about the environment, wages, or living coditions. The stuff just tastes better, and it's only 20% more in price.
Re:Warning! Don't read any Joseph Campbell: (Score:3, Insightful)
Thanks for considering me to be at least somewhat inteligent
Unfortunaly, I don't think that you our I exist outside of the curent culture - grudgingly, we are products of it. Even our decenting voices are products of this culture - flawed though it it, this culture seem to al least give lip-service to differing thougts. We haven't been locked up, or beaten too much.
Anyways, my general rant on Chomsky is that he is interesting, but ot only inefective, but possibly damaging to his own cause. I gather we're on opposite sides of the political fence - but there are vast terretories of common ground for people like us to discover. People like Raplh Nader and John McCain give me inspiration that we can have a better future - people like Chomsky and Limbaugh, although great entertainemnt, just devide rational people from each other.
All too often, a good idea gets labeled by one side or the other as belonging to "that hippie Chomsky" or "that fat idiot Limbaugh." It's too bad the these lables can destroy a potentionally good idea. Noam and Rush are just to easy of a target, and discourse dies when either one gets mentioned. Anyways - at least neighter of them are taking about stupid subjects like Elisibeth Taylor, or NSYNC so perhaps I'm being a bit harsh on both.
Cheers.
Re:Warning! Don't read any Joseph Campbell: (Score:2)
Cabpbell did indeed do this. And that is the problem - he made an attempt to stuff noble and self-contained cultural stories into a particularly odd Western idea of the "common Myth." It's stupid. It's like trying to make a big deal of pointing out that all computer languages are Turring complete. It's true - but it rather misses the point.
Cambell selectivly chooses to back his theory - and even in his own culture, he fails to explain away modern poerty - where many a modern poet somtimes tries to convey emotions rather than story.
So on the surface, Cambell is interesting, but its a diservice to other cultures to claim that their stories come from a unthinking group-thought, rahter than being motivated by their own ideas, and their own self-containded thoughts.
Maby if you feel that our live are already pre-ordained, could Cambell make sense, but I hope that we are all have free-will and arn't motivated into following Campbells pet theory of blindly following our ancesters stories over and over.
I firmly beleive, that their can be somthing new under the sun. We just have to be smart.
web-slinging arachnoid-nerd (Score:2)
Re:web-slinging arachnoid-nerd (Score:2)
Why must we compare these? (Score:2)
First, they are two separate genres. Sam Raimi needed to live up to the expectations set by the comic book. George Lucas needs to live up to his previous films. Lucas has to create the material where Raimi needs more to interpret. Lucas doesn't always succeed at not ripping off others but still, he has to create his material. This doesn't lessen Raimi's work--in many ways it is more difficult to interpret.
Second, film is art. Art shouldn't be derivative of what is "hot" at the box office. If Star Wars was derivative of what was being shown at the time we'd have a much different film. If anything, Lucas should *ignore* other films and get back to making a story that interests him. Star Wars interested him--Episode I sought to provide something for everyone else.
I have to disagree, as always, with Katz. Lucas needs to look inward and not to Campbell, Raimi, or even Stan Lee for help with his picture.
HE DID IT (Score:5, Funny)
A Dog Year (Score:3)
The book is A Dog Year [amazon.com], about his experiences with 4 dogs. My wife is currently reading it, and I haven't asked her much about it, but every once in a while she laughs a lot, and every once in a while she gets very angry.
My wife volunteers for the SPCA, and we're both really pro-adoption and pro-mutt. Katz isn't - he likes breeds (and believes that a dog's personality is mostly determined by breed), and he likes puppies, and he thinks rescuing dogs is a fad (and possibly a bad idea, because of the dog's emotional baggage). He also believes in putting a dog down when it has a major health complication (he puts down one lab for heart problems, the other for cancer). These differences in opinion are the source of much of the anger.
His style seems to be the "personal journalism" that we all love - relating all the experiences without much censorship. For instance, he says that he bought a puppy from the mall, then admits that it is a lousy idea to do so (the dog dies young). He admits how frustrating dogs can be, and how tempting it is to hit them when they are being frustrating. He also admits throwing a ball into a flooding river, causing his dog to go in after it and get washed down the river. He jumps in to save the dog, then gets trapped himself, and his other dog has to save the two of them.
Again, I can't recommend it, because I haven't read it. My wife thinks she may be able to recommend it, but not to SPCA types. If you want a book for SPCA types, an excellent one is Lost and Found [amazon.com]. The author, Elizabeth Hess, is also a journalist, and spends some time in an animal shelter. It hits all the interesting points, from euthenasia to puppy mills to the truth behind those AKC papers. I strongly recommend it to anyone who enjoys pets, especially if you are thinking of getting a new one.
Ticket $ales not a Fair Comparison (Score:4, Insightful)
In 1997, Titanic grossed about $600 million...adjusted for inflation...$0.6 BILLION.
So..Gone With the Wind made 3.83 TIMES AS MUCH as Titanic...
You wonder why they don't do things in terms of tickets sold don't you? They just keep increasing the price of movies so they can say last year's movie beat the year before's.
And yes, I do realize that these aren't opening week ticket sales; they are the total income for the movies.
I used this: Site [acusd.edu] (http://history.acusd.edu/gen/filmnotes/costs-mov
...sigh...you'd expect the Slashdot crowd to realize this...but since we're talking about Katz...I guess it slides.
Re:Ticket $ales not a Fair Comparison (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm not saying GWTW wasn't a colossal blockbuster or that it's not, ultimately, the movie that's sold the most tickets over time, but the comparison is kinda ridiculous when you look at it the way you did.
More secret powers? (Score:5, Funny)
I knew Batman was powerful, but I had no idea that he could transmute into works of architecture!
Re:More secret powers? (Score:3, Funny)
What? Shocked who?! (Score:5, Interesting)
If you just go to RottenTomatoes.com which compiles move reviews into one big list and takes the ratio of good to bad you'd know that SpiderMan got an unusually high 84% positive reviews. Check out the reviews [rottentomatoes.com]
Offtopic: also check out the review [rottentomatoes.com] for one of the worst movies of all time: Battlefield Earth. Some of the reviews are so funny it nearly makes me want to cry.
"Elephantine" (Score:2, Insightful)
John Katz, couldn't you have looked past the first goddamn paragraph of the NYTimes review [nytimes.com] of AOC to find some catchy word to snip? I mean, my God, the NYT review was announced on slashdot [slashdot.org] today?
So, /. readers, from which articles did JK cut and paste to get his Spidey-man ideas?
You can't compare the two... (Score:2)
Blatant Plagirism (Score:2)
Mr. Katz's quote:
most elemental tenets of myth, especially when compared to the increasingly elephantine Skywalker saga,
Quote from NY Times article, posted here [nytimes.com]:
and perhaps inwardly suspecting that the whole elephantine system is rotten.
Geez, stop stealing others' stuff and get an original thought, will ya?
Bullshit (Score:3, Flamebait)
Spiderman will do better because it'll be a better movie. Episode I was so bad, people don't want to be tortured again. It's that fucking simple.
And this is coming from a guy with an Empire poster hanging on his wall signed by George Lucas, Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher, and Harrison Ford.
Re:Bullshit (Score:2)
Re:Bullshit (Score:2)
Elements of Myth (Score:2, Insightful)
John Katz:Like Star Wars, Spider-Man has the classic elements of a successful myth.
Did I miss the part where he listed these classic elements?
John Katz:The old form still has legs.
Again. What form.
John Katz:Before, they could only read comics and fantasize about becoming more powerful.
Who is they? If your talking about the huddled masses of geekness, then I'd like to know under what pretensive storm of insight that we have become more powerful.
John Katz:Or he's a mutant wolverine with fingers of steel who can't ever have a casual beer with his pals.
Do you even read Marvel comics? I'm going to assume you mean wolverine. Who, BTW, is not a mutant wolverine, but a mutant human named wolverine. And his claws are retractable. Of course he can drink beer with his friends. Of course a long time reader such as yourself should be able to count the number of times on one hand that we've seen Wolverine drink beer. He smokes cigars and drinks the occassional hard liquor. My guess is Canadian whiskey. You do know he's from Canada, right?
John Katz:Stories like Spider-Man and Batman also have a uniquely American and, until September 11, old-fashioned sense of civics.
Huh?
John Katz:We seem to constantly be turning backwards to myths for inspiration and entertainment, while we are busy making the myths of tomorrow but don't really know which ones will take.
Again, could you please explain what Myths you are talking about. You mean mythology like Greek, Norse and biblical tales? Please show me where in the bible I can find a masked superhero with arachnid powers.
Some more interesting stuff. (Score:2, Informative)
From Queens? (Score:2)
I thought Spiderman lived in Chelsea. Please correct me if I am wrong. My whole world is warped.
Plagiarist!! (Score:2)
I couldn't help but notice that Mr. Katz is not using his original thoughts, but plagirizing from an article posted here on
Mr. Katz's quote:
most elemental tenets of myth, especially when compared to the increasingly elephantine Skywalker saga,
Quote from NY Times article, posted here [nytimes.com] [nytimes.com]:
and perhaps inwardly suspecting that the whole elephantine system is rotten.
Geez, stop stealing others' stuff and get an original thought, will ya?
Attention all planets of the Solar Federation! We have assumed control! - Neil Peart
I hate you so much. (Score:2)
Considering your built your quasi-career out of being a nerdy, alienated teenage boy, its startling how little you know about the comics you're writing about. 40 years of spiderman comics are quite a bit deeper than ~8 hours of pulp sci-fi.
I can give many examples, but hey, you haven't known what the hell you're talking about before, why try to correct you now? Just compare screenplays and start babbling.
Oh, and Jon, you're not going to get bit by a radioactive spider, and you're not going to test positive for midocholrians. The high school bullies will always be able to kick your ass, and you'll always be powerless to stop them. Sleep tight.
Wow, the insight of JK... (Score:2)
Star Wars Story Basic Too (Score:2, Informative)
Actually this is the Star Wars story as well. First trilogy: Anakin contract enormous powers (the Force), learns to use them, succumbs to evil. Second trilogy: Luke contracts enormous powers (the Force), learns to use them wisely and well, faces terrible danger, and redeems his father.
Of course there's some other themes, like man vs. technology, but I'd say the main theme of Star Wars is similar to the main theme of Spider-Man. Spider-Man and Star Wars were inspired by similar source materials as well: a comic book for the former, matinee serials for the latter.
The Comics' Code (Score:5, Informative)
Elaborate ratings systems and restrictive codes eventually suffocated the comics' angry, biting spirit and made them as bland as network TV -- a cultural loss and free-speech outrage heading soon to a computer near you -- but not before Marvel and other comic creators cranked out some classic yarns, from Spider-Man and Batman to the X-Men and other superheroic tales
For the record, the only real 'restrictive' code that comics have ever had was implemented in the 1950's, known as the Comics' Code Authority. This was a voluntary system, similar to modern movie ratings in the US today. It was brought in for the same reasons - the government was ready, willing, and able to deal with the issue itself, and the industry stepped up to the plate first.
Spider-Man and the X-Men weren't even a glimmer in Lee/Ditko/Kirby's collective eyes when the Code was introduced; what Katz is talking about here is beyond me. The bulk of early Marvel comics, well into the 1980's if not further, were highly sanatized due to the Code. Yes, they had some revolutionary stories, but they were 100% in compliance with the Code (or they wouldn't have gotten any decent distribution).
The only mainsteam comic to not abide by the Code until rather recently was, oddly enough, Spider-Man. Marvel did a 2 issue storyline involving drug use in the 70's - considered quite controversial at the time, and would never have passed the Code's strict standards. Marvel took a risk and released the issues without the Code approval on them. After that, it wasn't until the 80's at least, and moreso the 90's, before we really saw any comics without the Code prominent on their covers.
Now, the Code itself has changed radically over the years, and a lot of things in your average 'tame' comic these days would have been strictly forbidden in the 60's... but regardless, saying that Spider-Man and the X-Men did ANYTHING before the Code is not only false, it does a disservice to the original creators. Marvel in the early 60's managed to put out some amazing ideas, all while toeing the line nicely with the Comics' Code.
Re:The Comics' Code (Score:3, Funny)
I don't know about that.. (Score:3, Funny)
Uhm, this may not be obvious, but Thursday... (Score:2, Informative)
spiderman is basic??? (Score:2, Insightful)
Getting a super alien bio-suit, only to find out that it's eating you alive (well kinda) and then to have it show up on your ol' pal eddy brock turning him into your worst nightmare.
Having all sorts of crazy mutations and trying to work as a photographer for a guy who hates your guts.
Sure maybe if you just read one issue, it doesn't have all the crazy plot twists. But if you look over the whole spiderman story (as you should with the Star Wars story) it is filled with many suprises and lots of other funky stuff.
They're just two different genre's. Star Wars wouldn't do well as a comic book (which is why it sells as novel's) and spidey is great as a comic, but wouldn't be as a novel.
Not to Comicbook guy you but... (Score:2)
I don't think you were, the Golden age was way the hell back with World War II. Spiderman, and the rest of the popular Marvel comics of today are from the Silver age, which actually ended with the story that the move was about.
but not before Marvel and other comic creators cranked out some classic yarns, from Spider-Man and Batman to the X-Men and other superheroic tales.
The rating system was more to do with the horror comics and crime comics that were coming out at the time, rather than the superhero comics, and the system was put in pretty much in the fifties, during the McCarthy years. I'm not sure, but I think all of the superhero comics from Marvel were CCA approved, with the exception of the "Goblin's Last Stand Issues" around Amazing Spider Man 96-99. But that was because of drug use in the issues.
Or he's a mutant wolverine with fingers of steel who can't ever have a casual beer with his pals.
Ahem... claws. Greatest Canadian Superhero of all time, please don't goof him up.
Enough Comic Book guy stuff...
Peter Parker isn't as deep as the Skywalker brothers and Uncle Ben is no Obi-Wan. But as the box office receipts demonstrate, the writers at Marvel comics have held their own when it comes to myth-making. Sometimes, simpler is better.
Huh? A) who are the Skywalker brothers? B) What? Not as deep? Both are as shallow as kiddie pools.. movies made to sell merchandise.. don't get me wrong they're both fun and entertaining movies, but Starwars is based of crappy "Flash" serials from the 40's. It's not very deep. Good is good, evil is evil. And you can tell because the bad guy wears black and the good guy wears white. I understand your point about myth being more easily understood and entertaining, but isn't that obvious? People in general don't like to sit there going, "Huh?" after a movie. In terms of Sci-fi/fantasy movies as an artform there are a number that aren't as commerically successful as Spider-man, or the Starwars franchise, but they are equally as entertaining and slightly more artistic. Just of the top of my head, "Bladerunner" the directors cut is a much better movie than both.. is it as fun, no... but it's a better movie
Subversive ? (Score:2)
Far from being subversive, comics formed one of the most powerful and blatant mechanisms for establishing concensus. Had the government produced a deliberate plan to mould the minds of children so that they would grow into unquestionly patriotic and gung ho cannon fodder in preparation for the next war, I doubt they could have done any better. Try reading mainstream 50s 60s or 70s comics after "sed s/America/Russia/g" and imagine that you were looking at soviet propoganda. You would be horrified by the crudity and bias.
This changed later on of course, but how you can call the "golden period" of American comics subversive is beyond me.
To Katz, the Drama Queen (Score:2, Interesting)
Please get off of your drama-queenesque high horse. I normally don't have too large a beef against you, but even though relating everything to September 11th may seem like a higher level of thought, it's just unrealistic. Contrary to your beliefs, most people aren't strongly/directly affected by September 11th, and as such don't change their perception of diction in American language in response to the attack. Just because it happened does not mean that it must pervade every aspect of our lives, especially movie-going, and although it may have connections to our perceptions of evil/good, it does not define them. Although this sense of detachment may seem tragic in the wake of so many senseless deaths, it's the realistic state of American society... Weaving allusions to nonexistant connotations that seem complex and relevant is just a cheap way to impress less knowledgable readers... you should be ashamed.
I just.... (Score:2)
Greedy Pigs
Katz, have you even seen Star Wars? (Score:5, Insightful)
wimpy outer-borough kid contracts enormous powers, learns to use them wisely and well, faces terrible danger, sacrifices much.
Star Wars plot summary (from me):
wimpy outer-rim kid contracts enormous powers, learns to use them wisely and well, faces terrible danger, sacrifices much. Repeat.
So, what exactly is so different about the basic plot structures here? Split personality/dark and brooding hero whos powers seperate him from those he wants to be with? Hero doesn't get the girl? Yeah, remember Return of the Jedi? Never shirks on duty to the common good, even though it may cost him everything he holds dear? Yup, got that too. Maybe you mean the Orphan Hero thing... Oh wait, Star Wars has that, too.
All the myth elements you attribute to Spider-man have already been explored, repeatedly and in greater detail, in the Star Wars series, and Episodes 1-3 are following the same basic lines you've outlined as well, with a few minor twists. If spreading it out over multiple films makes it to hard for you to follow, than you have no business publishing a critical analysis of the subject matter.
I've never been a Katz basher, but come on! This so called 'comparison' is absurd.
uniquely American? (Score:2)
That's a uniquely American ideal? Hmmm. 'Cause America always [bbc.co.uk] strives [yahoo.com] to be responsible [cnn.com], right?
Mr. JonKatz, you can crawl out from the cave now.. (Score:3, Funny)
My God, Mr. Katz, you make Spider-Man sound like some indie flick from the early Kevin Smith days instead of a summer blockbuster that Sony Pictures, Inc. spent over $50 million marketing the flick to the masses. How does it surprise anyone other than you that it made $114 million? Here's a surprise prediction for you: Spider-Man, AotC, the Two Towers, and Goldmember are all going to make $200+ million dollars for their studios! Wow. I surprise myself! Maybe I should go into internet journalism and write witty and insightful columns about how everything relates to the Columbine shootings and the alienation of nonconformist high-schoolers... oh, wait. That position's filled.
Facile comparison (Score:3, Interesting)
Although I am disappointed in some of what Lucas has done with his franchise, let credit be given where due: the rarest achievement in cinema is the preplotted multi-part blockbuster film saga. Arguably THE GODFATHER was first, although Coppola could have quit at any time with honors. Most other series make it up as they go along. STAR WARS was the only prewritten SF saga until Peter Jackson came along with his Tolkien trilogy, and even then Jackson had the advantage of shooting everything at once and releasing at leisure.
No Columbine, No Globalism: Is This Really Katz? (Score:2, Funny)
Before, they could only read comics and fantasize about becoming more powerful.
Yeah, and I'm floored that he didn't stick a "post-Columbine" reference in here! And I didn't see globalism mentioned once! Has the world turned topsy-turvy?
GMD
Re:Holy shit, Batman (Score:5, Insightful)
It wasn't that reasonable. Note his following comment:
Peter Parker isn't as deep as the Skywalker brothers and Uncle Ben is no Obi-Wan
Clearly, Katz wasn't paying attention to some of the more subtle aspects of the Spider-man movie. The movie was Christ metaphor. He seems to have missed the Green Goblin's attempt to persuade Parker to join him (symbolic of Satan's tempting of Christ, offering him the whole world if only he would join forces with him). There was also the stigmata and shed blood, as well as a few more obvious biblical references for the clue-impaired (Goblin's attack on Aunt May, and his insistence on her finishing the prayer to state his nature).
And this doesn't even cover the Goblin's demonic dualism (he died from the nanogas. Was his powers the result of the gas? Or demonic possession of his corpse?) Notice his discussions with "himself"; there are clearly two personalities, and one of them is not merely a distortion of his former self, but a new entity altogether. Notice how he bows before it (the mask scene) and begs (unsuccessfully) for it not to use his body to perform its evil desires.
And that doesn't even go into the rejection of false dichotomies (the "will you save the woman you love or the innocent children?" choice). Parker's refusal to make that choice would be a great lesson for many of us, since similar false choices ("ban guns to save the children", "abandon civil liberties to protect ourselves from the terrorists", etc) confront many of us these days.
Spider-man may not have been even remotely a perfect movie, but to suggest that any random star wars movie has more "depth" is laughable.
Re: Ripping off Kurosawa (Score:2)
Re:This ad brought to you by: (Score:2)