Johnny Depp and Armie Hammer in “The Lone Ranger”
Return with us now to those thrilling days of yesteryear…
The mythical ouroboros is a serpentine creature that devours its own tail, symbolizing the cyclical nature of existence, and the phoenix-like “eternal return.” It’s a cool creature—and yet…
Like the ouroboros, the motion picture industry regularly eats its own tail as it recycles former cinematic successes in the hopes of reaping eternal monetary rewards. This summer, producers are attempting to dazzle us with new spins on old stories, stories that may indeed be worth retelling. We just wish they were better at it.
Take Star Trek Into Darkness. In 2009, filmmakers re-launched the Sixties-era Star Trek franchise with fresh young faces and wall-to-wall action. It was an entertaining effort that made money, so they were invited to continue with this summer’s sequel. Rather than go to the trouble of writing a compelling new story, they recycled an old one: 1989’s Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. Unfortunately, they made a Cliff’s Notes version of that great film, leaving out anything that had to do with rationale, emotion or even common sense. They gave us action, a familiar storyline, some well-remembered lines of dialogue and little else, other than a longing to re-watch the original.
Take Man of Steel, an attempt to bring Superman to the screen again. Since l933, Superman has embodied a wonderful, and uniquely American, mythology—the ultimate legend of a foreigner who finds acceptance and success in this great nation. Whether portrayed in the 1950’s by George Reeves, or in the 70’s and 80’s by Christopher Reeve, the story has remained suitable for adults and children alike. All had interesting takes on his Kryptonian origins and his relationship with his extended “family”—both on the farm and in the office on Earth. But while Man of Steel goes through the motions—we see him leave Krypton, meet his adoptive parents on Earth, and get introduced to future co-worker Lois Lane—the movie’s clear motivation is the “boom factor.” Filmmakers throw computer-generated superhuman bodies through one skyscraper after another, in the process harming countless regular human beings on the ground below. Kids (assuming you bring them) will learn that it’s okay to break stuff as long as you’re on the side of good.
Take The Lone Ranger. This new production loyally recalls the radio and television era Western hero’s origin: his brother’s death at the hands of the villainous Butch Cavendish, why he donned a mask, how he acquired his horse, Silver, and his bullets (also silver), and why his faithful companion Tonto calls him kemosabe. We actually liked this film, despite its many flaws, but as an extension of Disney’s Pirates of the Caribbean franchise rather than a faithful retelling of “those thrilling days of yesteryear.” Johnny Depp’s Tonto is a close cousin of pirate Jack Sparrow—not a bad thing, but not really honoring the Western tradition. As funny as it may be, and as delightful as the action sequences are, The Lone Ranger is as violent as Man of Steel. When people died in the Pirates films, they popped back up because they’d been dead in the first place. In Ranger, mortal beings die: Indians, ranchers, farmers, soldiers, Rangers. There’s no Boot Hill big enough to bury them. And like Into Darkness and Man of Steel, you could run a transcontinental railway through the plot holes. The filmmakers didn’t seem to care, or maybe they assumed we wouldn’t notice.
The heroes in all three films fight for “truth, justice and the American (or Federation) way.” We just wish they’d fought for better movies—perhaps one about the ouroboros. Hollywood would need only to look in the mirror for inspiration.
Paula Block Erdmann & Terry Erdmann
Paula and Terry each have long impressive-sounding resumes implying that they are battle-scarred veterans of life within the Hollywood studios. They’re now happily relaxed into Jacksonville.
Posted July 28, 2013
Paula and Terry identify as writers, with an ever-increasing number of published works to support the supposition. They live a primarily pastoral life in the enchanted town of Jacksonville.
Thank you for commenting on something that I’ve been saying under my breath all summer – What happened to stories making some sort of sense? I too have felt that all the three movies mentioned in your review left me wanting. Not because of the big-budget special effects, not because of the acting (which was better than the words uttered), but because the stories lacked story-telling.
I’m not suggesting that summer movies need to break any sort of literary ground, but Hollywood, quit slapping me in the face with plot lines that don’t even come close to justifying the actions of the characters. I’m probably going to go see your movies anyway, but if you want me to go see your movie more than once, or at the very least give it a review that doesn’t include shrugging my shoulders, give me a plot.
Yay, Stephen! Thanks for the words of support! This particular column has generated more “Yup–by golly, you’re right” comments from the locals than the bulk of our others. Nice to hear it also rang true in Denver!
And thanks for reading our column. It makes us feel like we’re keeping in touch with old friends!